ML20217H953
| ML20217H953 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Millstone  |
| Issue date: | 10/15/1997 |
| From: | Schopfer D SARGENT & LUNDY, INC. |
| To: | NRC OFFICE OF INFORMATION RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (IRM) |
| References | |
| 9583-100, NUDOCS 9710200001 | |
| Download: ML20217H953 (85) | |
Text
. - _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ - _ _ _
,_ j/
Ah
, k[ 3
, Sargont ik Lundy ' *
\($
Don K. Schopter Vice Prevdent 312 269-6078 October 15,1997 Project No. 9583100 Docket No. 50-423 Nonheast Nuclear Energy Company Millstone Nuclear Power Station, Unit No. 3 Independent Corrective Action Verification Program United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission Attention: Document Control Desk Washington, D.C 20555
-I have enclosed the following twenty-seven (27) discrepancy reports (DRs) identified during our review activities for the ICAVP, These DRs are being distibuted in accordance with the Communications Protocol, PI-MP3-01, DR No. DR-MP3-0082 DR No. DR-MP3-0316 DR No. DR-MP3-0113 DR No. DR-MP3-0320 DR No. DR-MP3-0122 DR No. DR-MP3-0321 .
l' ,
DR No. DR-MP3-0155 DR No. DR-MP3-0322 DR No. DR-MP3-0166 DR No. DR-MP3-0330 DR No. DR-MP3-0239 DR No. DR-MP3-0335 DR No. DR-MP3-0244 DR No. DR-MP3-0336 DR No. DR-MP3-0264 DR No. DR-MP3-0347 DR No. DR-MP3-0268 DR No. DR-MP3-0352 DR No. DR-MP3-0273 DR No. DR-MP3-0358 DR No. DR-MP3-0276 DR No. DR-MP3-0362 DR No. DR-MP3-0281 DR No. DR-MP3-0366 DR No. DR-MP3-0309 DR No. DR-MP3-0390 DR No. DR-MP3-0391 9710200001 971015
. ;" ^ " ' na ipppupun 55 East Montce Street
- Chicago IL 60603-5780 USA + 312 269-2000
.g.
United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission ' October 15,1997 Document Control Desk Project No. 9583-100 Page 2 I have also enclosed the following ten (10) DRs that have been determined invalid. No action is required from Northeast Utilities for these ten DRs. The basis for their invalid determination is included on the document.
DR No. DR MP3-0078 DR No. DR-MP3-0231 DR No. DR MP3-0171 DR No. DR-MP3-0350 DR No; DR-MP3-0210 DR No. DR-MP3-0376 DR No. DR-MP3-0221 DR No, DR-MP3-0407 DR No. DR-MP3-0223 DR No. DR-MP3-0414 I have also enclosed the following sixteen (16) DRs for which the NU resolutions have been reviewed and accepted by S&L.
DR No. DR-MP3-0003 DR No. DR-MP3-0055 DR No. DR-MP3-0004 DR No. DR-MP3-0060 DR No. DR-MP3-0008 DR No. DR-MP3-0080 DR No. DR-MP3-0018 DR No. DR-MP3-0085 DR No. DR-MP3-0034 DR No. DR-MP3-0095 DR No. DR-MP3-0036 DR No. DR-MP3-0100 DR No. DR-MP3-0043 DR No. DR-MP3-0141 DR No. DR-MP3-0046 DR No. DR MP3-0154 Please direct any questions to me at (312) 269-6078, Yours very truly, e 3.Y \ -
N D. K. Schopfer Vice President and ICAVP Manager DKS:spr Enclosures Copies:
E. Imbro (1/l) Deputy Director, ICAVP Oversight T. Concannon (1/l) Nuclear Energy Advisory Council J. Fougere (1/1) NU mNeavpowr\97erl015-a. doc
. -. 1 - - -- -- - - - - -
Northeast Utilities ICAVP DR No. DR-MP3-0082 Millstone Unit 3 Discrepancy Raport
(^h Review Oroup: System DR VAUD Review Element: system Desgn Diecipline: Pipirg Design Pdential Operabilsty issue Discrepancy Type: Calculetson Q yee SystemProcess: R$s (j)No NRC Significance level: 4 Date faxed to NU:
Date Published:
otocrepe46 Lack of analytical basis for operating temperature limit for unsteeved containment penetrations
Description:
In the process of reviewing the following documents, (i) FSAR Section 3.8.1.1, Description of the Containment (ii) FSAR Section 3.8.1.1, Steel Liner and Penetrations (iii) FSAR Section 3.8.1.5.2, Stt,el Liner and Penetration Structural Acceptance Criteria (iv) Design Criteria for Containment Uner Penetrations, NETM-54, Issued May 1984 (v) Calculation No.12179-NS(B)-120 Rev. 2, CCN #9, ' Class 2 Unsleeved Penetrations' (vi) SWEC Calculation 12050-NS(B)-043-LP Vol. 3, Feb.1979, Virginia Electric Power Co., North Anna Unit 2.
we noted the following discrepancy:
p
Background:
Based on FSAR Section 3.8.1.1 (i): The design, analyses, and construction of the containment structure is similar to that of Virginia Electric and Power Company, North Anna Power Station, Units 1 and 2.
Based an FSAR Section 3.8.1.1.4 (ii): Unsleeved penetrations consist of piping installed through the containment wall that is thermally cold, and the process pipe is welded directly to the reinforcement plate.
Based on FSAR Section 3.8.1.5.2 (iii): Initial penetration sizing is performed in accordance with Table 3.8-2. The final design verification is in accordance with Tables 3.8-4 through 3.8-6.
Based on the Design Criteria for Containment Liner Penetrations (iv): Unsleeved penetrations are used for thermally cold systems, where the operating temperature inside the process pipe is 200 deg F or less. Sleeved penetrations are used for all thermally hot -
systems, where the operating temperature inside the penetration is more than 200 deg F.
Calculation NJ(B) 120 (v) performs the final evaluation for the Unsleeved Containment Penetrations in accordance with FSAR O
V Tables 3.8-4 through 3.8-6 (iii). The penetrations are considered as fixed end pipes. The analytical procedure for the thin shell analysis of a fixed end pipe is referenced to the North Anna Calculation NS(B)-043-LP (vi).
Pnnted 10/14/97 4.28.54 PM Pege 1 of 2
, .3 ,e_m%am_
w %-~-'-""
Northeast Utilities ICAVP DR No. DR MP3-0042 Ministone unit 3 Discrepancy Report Olscrepancy: '"
No justification is provided in Calculation NS(B) 120 (v) for the 200 deg F process temperature limit for Unsleeved penetrations.
The caN!ation which forms the basis for it e initial penetration sizing and analyzes the penetration desi0n for the load conditions identified in FSAR Table 3.8 2 (iii) is not referenced, and therefore the associated temperature basis of 200 deg F can not be vertfled.
Review Valid invalid Needed Date initiator: Pre w ..L O O VT Leed: Nort, Anthony A O 101hS7 Q Q O 10/1097 VT Mgt: Schopfer Don K O O O 10/$$S7 IRC Chrnn: Singh, Anand K
__ Q Q Q 'oli497 Date:
INVALID:
i bate:
RESOLUTION:
( Previously identined by NU7 (J Yes t No Review g p g ^:- ~
Not Acceptelde Needed Date VT Leed: Nort, Anthony A O O O VT Mgr: Schopter, Don K IR0 Chmn: Singh, Anand K te, sL Comments:
Printed tot '497 4 29.05 PM Page 2 of 2
Northeast Utilities ICAVP DR No. DR MP3 0113 Millstone Unit 3 Discrepancy Report nev6.w oroup: contgurman DnvAuo Review tement: System ine'eheten
% vine: Pipirq Dwg" Diecrepen.-i ype:Instematenimpternentaten Y
Ow 4g system /Procese: sWP ~
NRC significance levet: 4 Date faxed to NU:
Date Publ6ehed' 06ecrepency: Walkdown Discrepancies Of The SWP in The ESF Building D#cr$puon: The following discrepancies and material condition items were observed during the walkdown of the piping and mechanical equipment of the SWP in the ESF Building:
- 1. Drain valve line with valve 3SWP*V174 is capped but not shown as s=h on isometric Cl SWP 28 Sht 7 Rev 9 or P&lD EM-133B Rev34.
- 2. Drain valve line with valve 3SWP*V179 is capped but not shown as such on isometric Cl SWP 28 Sht 8 Rev 9 or P&lD EM.
133B Rev34.
3.Fleid installation of instrument line to 3SWP PDIS166B does not agree with isometric drawing EK 526079.
- 4. Pipe support shown on drawing BZ 19R-6-3 Rev 3 for line O 3SWP 002 068 3 has an additional unistrut attached for conduit that is not shown on the drawing.
- 5. Valve 3SWP* V137 and associated line is routed in the horizontal plane and in the west direction. Isometric drawing CP-319015 Sht 3 Rev 9 shows tlils line to be in the horizontal plane rotated 45 degrees from the north (i.e. northwest d! action).
- 6. The lee for valve 3SWP*V2002 is located after the first bend from 3SWP*V145 instead of before the bend as shown on the isometric drawing EK 526078.
The following material condition items were observed during the walkdown of the piping and mechanical equipment of the SWP in the ESF building:
- 1. Valve 3SWP* V137 shows leakage and the entire valve has rust.
- 2. Valve 3SWP*V56 shows leakage and is rusting.
- 3. Valve 3SWP*V147 shows packing and gasket leakage.
- 4. Line 3 SWP 150-06103 has sections with the insulation missing. No DCN was found for this insulation removal nor a Work in Process Tag was observed at the location.
A Q 5. Line 3-SWP 150 0613 has a section of insulation missing. No DCN was found for this insulation removal nor a Work in Process Tag was observed at the location.
Printed 1o/1497 4 32.50 i14 Page 1 of 3
Northeast Utilities ICAVP DR No. DR MP3 0113 Mllistone Unit 3 Descrepancy Report
- 6. Valve 3SWP*V55 w #s leakage and is rusting.
- 7. Lines 3 SWP 750 Li4,3 SWP 750 252 3. 3 SWP 750 254 3, and 3 SWP 750 245 3 have insulation missing No DCN was found for this insulation removal nor a Work in Process Tag was observed at the location.
- 8. Valve 3SWP*VS3 packing shows leakage and the entire valve is rusting.
O. Line 3 SWP 003-67 3 has a section with Insulation missing.
No DCN was found for this insulation removal nor a Work in Process Tag was observed at the location.
- 10. Line 3 SWP-003 312 3 and 3 SWP 003 210 3 has section with Insulation missing. No DCN was found for this insulation removal nor a Work in Process Tag was observed at the location,
- 11. Line 3 SWP 002 385 3 and 3 SWP 002 69 3 has insulation missing. No DCN was found for this insulation removal nor a Work in Process Tag was observed at the location.
- 12. Valve 3SWP*V21 packing shows leakage.
- 13. Lines 3 SWP 002 384 3,3 SWP 002 386 3, and 3 SWP 002-402 3 have insulation missing. No DCN was found for this insulation removal nor a Work in Process Tag was observed at the location.
- 14. Lines 3 SWP-002146-3 and 3 SWP 002 4013 have insulation missing. No DCN was found for this insulation removal nor a Work in Process Tag was observed at the location.
- 15. Valve 3SWP*V52 packing shows leakage.
- 16. Line 3 SWP 002145-3 has insulation missing. No DCN was found for this insulation removal nor a Work in Process Tag was observed at the location.
17, Valve 3SWP'V20 packing shows leakage.
- 18. Lines 3 SWP 750 279 3 and 3-SWP 750 255-3 have insulation missing. No DCN was found for this insulation removal nor a Work in Process Tag was observed at the location.
- 19. Lines 3-SWP 002 382 3,3 SWP 002 383 3,3-SWP 002146-3 and 3 SWP 002 4013 have Insulation missing. No DCN was found for this insulation removal no.' a Work in Process Tag was observed at the location.
- 20. Valves 3SWP*V149 and *V155 packing shows leakage.
- 21. Line 3-SWP 150-072 3 has insulation missing. No DCN was farand far thle inendatinn rgnnuni nnr n Warer in Drnemee Tnn wne Prtnted 10/1497 4 32.s8 PM
~
~ ~ ~ ~
~
' Va@e 2 of 3
Northeast Utilities ICAVP DR No. DR MP3.)113 Millstone Unit 3 Discrepancy Report observed at the location.
- 22. Valve 3SWP'V51 packing shows leakage and t.4. ciaft is rusting. Mfg. laLet is missing. w
- 23. Line 3 SWP.150-072 3 has section of insulation missing. No DCN was found for this insulation removal nor a Work in Process Tag was observed at the location.
- 24. Line 3 SWP.150-0713 has sections of insulation missing. No DCN was found for this insulation removal nor a Work in Process Tag was observed at the location.
- 25. Restricting Orifice 3SWP*RO1250 has 4 bolts with no thread extending through the nuts. Also insulation has been removed and no Work in Process tag was observed at the location.
- 26. Valve 3SWP'V24 shows leakage and stem is rusty.
- 27. Line 3 SWP 0021<'. 3 has insulation missing. No DCN was found for this insulation removal nor a Work in Process Tag was observed at the location.
Rev6ew Votid lnytt6d Needed D:t;.
Initietor: Reed, J. W, O O O So*87 VT Lead: Nort. Anthony A g Q Q 10/1/97 gO VT Mgr: schopfer. Don K G O O 'o'55S7 IRC Chmn: singh. Anand K Q O O 'or'2S7 D.i.:
INVALID:
Date:
RESOLUTION:
~
Previously identined 1:y Nu? O Yes #1 No Rev6ew initiator: Road, J. W. * ***
Date:
sL Comments O
Pnnted 10/1497 4 33.o3 PM Pege 3 of 3
Northeast Utilities .
ICAVP DR No. DR MP3 0122 millstone Unit 3 Discrepancy Report ~
heview Group: Sptom DR VALID bytew Eletrimt: System Desgn Diecipewie: Electncet Doogn potentiet operstdiety issue D't.repancy Type Dro*V'O Q y,,
SysteervProcese: N/A tG) No NRC sigrescence level: 4 Dele faxed to NU:
Date Putdiohed:
Descrepency: Schematic and wiring drawing discrepancies at motor control centers.
Desertption.. Various discrepancies were identifled between common figures (details), as shown on the wiring diagrams, and the corresponding schematic diagrams as listed below:
- 1) Motor Control Center (MCC) intemal wiring diagram (EE-9JF), figure SA indicates point 5 of contact 42 0 is connected to terminal point 4. The schematic diagram ESK-6AAA (3SWP'MOV57A) Indicates point 5 of contact 42 0 is connected to point 6 of device 49X. In addition, wiring diagram EE.9JF indicates point 3 of contact 42-C is connected to terminal point 2 in figure SA. Schematic diagram ESK 6AAA Indicatas point 3 of contact 42 C is connected to point 4 of device 49X. Similar situation for 3SWP'MOV578 (ESK-6AAB),3SWP'MOV57C (ESK-6AAC), WWP*MOVS/D (ESK 6AAD),3SWP*MOV102B (ESK-6AAV), 3SWP'MOV102D (ESK-6AAX), 3SWP'MOV115A O (ESK-6AGF),3SWP'MOV115B (ESK 6AGG),3RSS*MOV20A (ESK 6LD),3RSS*MOV200 (ESK-6LE),3RSS'MOV200 (ESK-6LF),3RSS*MOV20D (ESK 6LG),3RSS*MV8837A (ESK 6LM),
3RSS'MV8838A (ESK-6LN), 3RSS*MV88378 (ESK-6LP),
3RSS'MV88388 (ESK-6LQ), and 30SS*MOV34A (ESK 6LS).
- 2) Schematic diagram (ESK 6AAX) for service water motor operated valve (3SWP*MOV102D) Indicates terminal point 2 is in-between contact 57 58 of 52S-3SWP'P1D and contact 5-6 of 49X. VMng diagram EE 9GB Indicates terminal point 2 is wired in the circuit between contact 57 58 of $2S 3SWP'P1D and the close torque switch (TOS17),
- 3) Schematic diagram ESK-6AAG (3SWP'MOV54B) indicates a connection between points 4 and 12 in the ' seal in' portion of the open circuit. The corresponding MCC intemal wiring diagram (EE 9JM, figure SE) does not Indicate this connection. In addition, the wiring diagram (EE 9JM, figure SE) indicates a connection between terminal points 2 and 7, the schematic (ESK 6AAG) does not Indicate this connection. Similar for 3SWP'MOV54D (ESK 6AAJ),3SWP'MOV50A (ESK-6AAK),
3SWP'MOV508 (ESK-6AAL), 3RSS*MOV38A (ESK 6AFL), and 3RSS*MOV388 (ESK 6AFM).
- 4) Schematic diagram ESK 6AAW (3SWP*MOV10?C) indicates the use of a transfer switch (43-3SWP'MOV102C) in the control circult. The schematic and wiring diagram (2424.100-245 sht f
' 689) do not match in various cases. As an example, the schematic ir'dicates point 26 of the switch is connected to terminal point TBC 8, only. The wiring diagram indicates and Printed 1o/1497 4 30.58 PM Page 1 of 2
Northeast Utilities ICAVP DR No. DR MP3 0122 Millstone Unit 3 Discrepancy Report additional connection to point 27 of the same switch. Similar situation for 3SVvP*MOV102A (ESK-6AAU & 2424,100 245 sht.
689),
- 5) The wiring diagrams for 3SWP'MOV102A (EE 9JM, figure SD
& EE 9FX) indicates fuse FU1 point 2 (3SWP*MOV102A) is connected in the close circuit, between the torque switch (TOS17) ard TBB-47. The schematic diagram (ESK 6AAU)
Indicates the fuse FUI point 2 le connected to TBB 48.
Revbv Vehd involk! Needed Date instnetor: Morton. R.
VT Lead: Nort, Anthony A O O O $15S7 VT Mgri Schopfer, Don K O O O $0'$/87 G O O 10/1257 1RC Chmn: Singh, Anand K O O O ioS7 Date:
UNALlo:
e Date:
RESOLUTION:
Prevmusly identined by NU? Q Yes iG) No Review initiaWt Morton, R. * **# *
~e ,
sL Conwnents:
n v
Pnnled 10/1497 4 31:o9 PM Pe9e 2 of 2
Northeast Utilities ICAVP DR No. DR MP3 0156 Millstone Unit 3 Discrepancy Repoft Rev6ew Group: Accident Mfbpshon DR V4Llo Rev6ew Elemonu Operating Proceoure Diecipl6ne: Mechenecel Desgn pg,,,, ,. DoeraWisty kaue Dioctopancy Type: Licerwng Docurrent
( ) y,,
systertvProcess: N/A j) No
~
NRC signifnconce level: 4 Date rAXed to NU:
Date Pub 66ehed:
Discrepency: Time Crttical Activities Not identifled in EOPs or Operator Training Manuals.
Deecription: In the response to a locked rotor event, the analysis described in FSAR $15.3.3.4 assumes that a Steam Generator Relief Valve is stuck open. The analysis assumes "the affected steam Generator is isolated, by operator action, to close the isolation valve upstream of the relief valve within 20 minutes" to limit the offsite dose.
The ICAVP reviewed AOP 3554, EOP 35 E 0, EOP 35 E 2, and the lesson plans used to train the operators for various accident scenarios, The accident analysis, FSAR $15.3.3.4, assumes that the isolation valve closure occurs within 20 minutes of the accident as a sneans of limiting the potential ortsste cose. However, there is no mention of a time requirement in the above procedures or
( In the training materials. Therefore, the operator is not cognizant of a need to close the isolation valve within the 20-minute period.
Review Vaad invaad Needed Date initiator: Peeblos, W. R.
O O O 10/1oS7 VT Lead: Rahele, Raj D G O O 10/1oS7 VT Mgr: Schopfer Don K IRC Chrnn: Singh, Anand K Q O O 10'15S7 Q Q Q 10/1497 Dei.:
INVALlo:
Date:
RESOLUTION:
Previously idenufned by Nu? Q Yee t No Review initiator: Peeblos, W. R. **** ^**
-e sL Conwnents:
O
, Prtnted 10/1497 4 31:s3 PM Pey 1 of 1
__ __-__m_ _ _ _
Northeast Utilities ICAVP DR No. DR MP3 0166 Millstone Unit 3 .
Discrepancy Report Review Group: System DR VALID R._ . e- p _ e _ y,es.e Diecipl6ne: I& C Deegn Q y,,
Discrepency Type: Calculshon Systemerocess: sWP (i) No NRC significance level: 4 Date Faxed to NU:
Date Published:
D6*croPency: Calculation SP 3SWP.1 methodology vs. RG1.105 commitment D*eertption: The purpose of calculation SP 3SWP.1, Rev. 2 is to determine differential pressure setpoint for switches 3SWP'PDIS24A,B,C,D giving start permissilve to 3SWP'STRI A,B,C,0 strainer motors.
During the review of Calculation SP 3SWP.1, the following was discovered:
- 1. Per objective section of the calculation, the calculation has been performed to compensate for the instrument channel inaccuracy as per the requirements of Reg Guide 1,105. The Reg. Guide endorses ISA 67.041982,'Setpoints for Nuclear Safety Related instrumentation used in Nuclear Plants". Various components identified in this document that need to be considered for calculating the setpoint uncertainty . e.g.,
calibration uncertainty, measunng and test equipment uncertainty, calibration tolerance, seismic event impact etc. have T not been addressed.
Review Vead invalid Needed Date initiator: Hitxhe. R. O O O neass7 VT Lead: Nort, Anthony A O O O 10/1/97 VT Mgt: Schopfer, Don K IRC Chmn: Singh, Anand K Q O O $0/12S7 O O O 10/5'S7 Date:
INVALlo:
Date:
RESOLUTION:
Prov6ously identafled by Nu? U Yee @ No Review initletor: Hinde, R. * ***
VT Lead: Nort, Anthony A VT Mgr: Schopfer, Don K IRC Chmn: Singh, Anand K =
g SL Comments:
O Printed 1o/1497 4 33.52 PM Popm 1 of 1
_ ._ __ _=
Northeast Utilities ICAVP DR No. DR MP3 0239 Millston Unit 3 Discrepancy Report Revieworoups system DR VAUD Revw. ci-noni: smem c- en Dioetpl6ne: I&CDash P ,ent io ,e,.tui.iyi..u.
4 y,,
Diecrepancy Type: Drawing system /Procese: $WP O No NRC signincance level: 4 Date faxed to NU:
Date Putd6ehed:
Dmcrepancy: Drawing Discrepancy Schematics 3SWP 060A,B Deecript6en: Per Section 12.6.1 of the Design Basis Summary Document, 3DBS BOP 001, "A radiation monitor shall be located on the outlet of each RSS Heat Exchanger...". This disagrees with P&lD EM 133B which shows two radiation monitors; 3SWP*RE60A at the discharge header of 3RSS"E1A, E1C and 3SWP'RE60B at the discharge header of RSS'E1B, E1D. Loop Schematics 3SWP 060A, Rev 4 and 3SWP 0608. Rev 3 agree with the above PalD. In addition. FSAR Section 6.2.2.2, System Design, Subsection on the Containment Recirculation System dated 5/97 etates "The service water from each pair of the recirculation coolers is monitored by a radiation monitor ...".
P&lD EM 1338 shows local alarms for high radiation and failed channel and a control room common high radiation alarm; the Loop Schematic does not show these alarms.
Rev6ew Val 6d inveled Needed Date d Inattetor: Pmies, H. g Q Q 9/2697 VT Lead: Nort. Anthony A O O O 10/5/87 VT Mgr: Schopfw, Don K Q O O $0/55S7 IRC Chmn: Singh, Anand K Q Q Q 10/1497 D.i.:
INVAUo:
Date:
RESOLUTION:
Prev 6ously identined by NUF Q Yes @ No Rev6ew initiator: Pinenes. H.
VT Lead: Nort, Anthony A O O O VT Mgt: Schopfer, Don K IRC Chmn: Smgh, Anand K Date:
sL Comments:
O Printed 10/1497 4 34.45 PM Page 1 of 1
Northeast Utilities ICAVP DR No. DR MP3 0244 Millstone Unit 3 Discrepancy Report Rev6ew Oroup: Confguraten DR VALIO Review Element: System inattinaten
, , ,,g,g ,,,
Diecipl6 net ElectncelDe66gn Discrepancy Type: Instellaten Requiremente O va 1,3 g system /Proce6s: SWP ~
NRC Sigruncence level: 4 Date faxed to NO:
Date Pubilehod:
D6scroPancy: Conduit not supported in accordance with standards Deecription: Conduit 3CC491PB2 is connected to Panel (wall mounted I
junction box) 3HVK'PNLCHL18. The first support on this conduit from the junction box is approximately four feet from the box. This length exceeds the allowable 3 feet as established by Drawing BE 52XR ReV 5 note 18.
Rev6ew Val 6d invei6d Needed Date Inittetor: Server, T. L.
VT Lead: Nort, Anthony A O O O 3057 O O O 10'1/87 VT Mgr: Schopfer Don K g O O 1o/1197 IRC Chmn: Singh, Anand K Q O O 10/1'S7 Date:
INVALlO:
Date:
RESOLUTION:
Prevusualy idermhed by NUF Q Yes el No Review initiator: Server, T. L.
VT Lead: Nort, Anthony A O O O VT Mgt: Schopfer Don K IRC Chmn: Singh, Anand K D.t..
sL Comnents:
O Printed 10/1497 4.35:31 PM Page 1 of 1
Northeast Utilities ICAVP DR No. DR4AP3 0264 Millstone Unit 3 Discrepancy Report Rev6ew Group: Programmatic DR VAUD Rev6ew Element: Corrective Acton Process Potential Opereb6Hty leaue D'**"a': 0*'
Diecropency Type: Correctre Acton O vos 4 y, systemfrocoes: N/A ~
NRC signancancelevel 4 Date faxed to NU:
Date Published:
~
D6mteper.cy: Volded Unresolved item Reports (UIRs) Considered to be in Scope Descr6ption: The following UlRs were received for review with the final disposition noted as "Vold". These UIRs are considered to be in the scope of the Configuration Management Plan (CMP) and should have been dispositioned and resolved. No indication is given that the recommended disposition has been or will be implemented, UIR2424 UIR2468 UIR1594 UIR1959 UIR2314 UIR1958 UlH2143 UIR2458 O UIR2472 UlR2132 UIR2256 Review Vaud inval6d Needed - Date initletor: Neverro, Mark O O O 10' 7 VT Leed: Ryan, Thomme J g ] [ 10/1/97 VT Mgr: Schopfer, Don K IRC Chmn: Singh, Anand K O O O 10/SS7 O O O 10/1'S7 Date:
INVAUD:
, Date:
RESOLUTION, Prov6ously identined bw NUF i,) Yes i9i No Review intletor: Neverro, Mark * ***
VT Leed: Ryan, Thornee J O O O VT Mgri Schopfer, Don K IRC Chmn: Singh, Anand K =
Date:
sL Cortunenta:
O Printed 10/1497 4 36 20 PM Page 1 of 1
Northeast Utilities ICAVP DR No. DR MP3 0268 Millstone Unit 3 Discrepancy Report
(
Review Group: system DR VAUD Review Elemer4. hstem Desgn Dnechplene: In eturai dew 6 Potential Operabil6ty issue Discrepancy Type c,k ulaten Q y,,
System / Process: N/A Y) No NRc Signincance level: 3 Date faxed to NU:
Date Published:
Discrepancy: Pipe Support Design Criterta Discrepancy D*ecripuon: Technical Procedure no EMTP 9.13 0,ReV.0,Section 7.1.6 states " Supports that utilize muttlple welded attachments shall
- nclude in their analyses consideration that the load may not be distributed evenly. This may be done by considering that the entire load is taken by each attachment...."
Calculations for pipe supports with two welded attachments which were reviewed, consider either 50&50% or 60%-40% load distribution among the two attachments. The calculations do not provide the references or document the justifications for this load distribution.
Review Valid invalid Needed Date inittetor: Klanc, N VT Lead: Nort, Anthony A O O O 16257 VT Mgr Schopfer Don K Q Q Q 10397 Q Q Q 10/1397 V) 5 IRC Chmn: 66ngh, Anand K Date:
Q Q Q 1o/1397 INVALID:
Date:
RESOLUTION:
Previously identined by Nu7 O Yes #1 No Review initletor Klaic, N * ^* *'#*
sL Conwnents:
O Einted 1o/1497 4.37f)9 PM Page 1 of 1
Northeast Utilities ICAVP DR No, DR MP3 0273 Millstone Unit 3 Discrepancy Report Revtew Group: system DR VM Review Element: system Dee9" Potent 6elOperatHhty issue Diecipl6ne: I & C Doogn Discrepancy Type: calculation 4) Yee systerWProcese: sWP O No NRC sign 6Aconce levoi: 3 Date Faxed to NU Date Putdehed:
D6*cropency: Calculation SP 3SWP 27 is not in compliance with Reg. Guide 1.105 requirements.
Descr$Ption: Calculation SP 3SWP 27. Rev. O in its present form does not comply with the requirements of Reg, Guide 1.105. The calculation, dated 51184, does state in a note that NUSCo is developing radiation level setpoints. However,there is no evidence that this calculation was prepared.
A setpoint calculation in accordance with Reg. Guide 1.105 is required based on the following:
1 A review of the PMMS database; Technical Requirement Manual . Clarification, section 3TRM 3.3.3.9; , titled Radioactive Liquid Eff..,ent Monitoring instrumentation'; and Technical Specification section 3.3.3.9, titled 'Radiactive Liquid Effluent Monitoring instrumentation'; indicates tnese Instruments are Tech. Spec. related.
2 Millstone Design Basis Response to Reg Guide 1.97, Rev. 2; FSAR table 7.51, titled ' Safety Related Display instrumentation (PMS); and document DBD-BOP 001, titled ' Service Water System'; indicate these instrum .nts are Reg. Guide 1,97 related.
A review of applicable corrective action database for Millstone 3 has not identified any pending chango notice items tha' will incorporate calculation revidlon to SP 3SWP 27, Review Valid invalid Needed Date initletor: Hindas, R. g Q Q 10/2;97 VT Lead: Nort, Anthony A g Q Q 1D297 VT Mgr: Schopfer, Don K g Q Q 1o/1397 IRC Chmn: singh. Anand K G O O 10/5'S7 Date:
INVALID:
Date:
RESOLUTION Prev 6ously identmed by NU7 C) Yee f No Review initletor: Hindia, R. * **'N VT Lead: Nort, Anthony A VT Mgt: Schopfer, Don K IRC Chmn: Singh, Anand K Date:
O O O Printed 1o/1497 4 37.5g PM Page 1 of 2
Northeast Utilities ICAVP DR No. DRMP3 0273 Millstone Unit 3 Discrepancy Report st commnts:
O 4
O Printed 10/1497 4.209 PM Page 2 of 2 ,
Northeast Utilities ICAVP DR No. DR MP3 0276 umstone Unit 3 Discrepancy Report G
Review Group: System DR VAW Review El4 mont: System Desen ospine: a.ctnces oavn Potential operetniny luue DiscrepentY I/Pe: Conculation o ya System /Procese: Oss @) No NRC sigrdftconce level: 4 Date faxed to NO:
Date Published:
Discrepency: QSS*P3B Motor Protective Relay Setting Ducr Nion: A review of the relay setting calculation GM-60-03.401CA in SP.
EE 321 Identified this calculation as only for pump 30SS*P3A.
A review of the NU calculation database TIMC010 on 9/17/97 for 30SS*P3B identiflod relay setting calculation GM 60 03.501CA, which has been volded, and refers to calculation SP EE 269, Calculation SP EE 269 does not have the relay setting calculntion for this pump. The NU Relay Record file page GM-60 03.501 for Pump 30SS*P3B (included in SP EE 321 as page 2 501) provides the relay settings for 30SS*P3B and refers to voided calculation GM-60-03.501CA. The relay settings in the NU Relay Record file page GM-60-03.501 do not agree with alther the voided calculation or 30SS*P3A's calculation GM 03.401CA for time tap setting. However, the llT and ITH settings agree with the 3OSS*P3A calculation GM-60-03.401CA and the heiay Recora nie page GM-60-03.401 (SP EE 321 page 2 401) for SQSS*P3A. A review of the schematic ESK 5DH for contact operation of the overcurrent relay shows that the time contact Q will alarm when an overcurrent above its setting occurs, however a tripping will only occur in conjunction with the operation of the ITH contact or indepentently with the llT contact. Since the time tap setting is at or below the ITH setting, the protective tripping will occur at the same ampere value for both pumps, only the alarm will initiate at a lower ampere level for the 30SS*P3A pump.
In summary, there is no direct basis for the relay settings for pump 3OSS'P38, although the present trip protective settings match 3QSS*P3A, but not the alarm setting.
Review Valid invalid Needed Date inattetor: Schroodce, D. A.
Q Q Q 10697 VT Leed: Nort, Anthony A g Q Q 1W7/97 VT Mgr: Schopfer Don K Q Q Q 1o/1397 IRC Chmn: Singh, Anand K O O O '0/14S7 Date:
INVALID:
Date:
RESOLUTION:
Previously identifted by NU7 (.f) Yes el No O
initletor: Schrosoe, D. A.
VT Lee:l: Nerl. Anthony A Rev6ew Printed 10/1497 4 42.5e PM Page 1 of 2
.s__.-. . _ _ . --- - - - . - - . - - . . _ . - - -, ___
Northeast Utilities ICAVP DR No. DR.MP3 0276 Millstone Unit 3 Discrepancy Report Q . ..m_ ,"
VT Men Schopfer, Don K ,
O O g
IRC Chmn: Srgh, Anand K '
Date: -
O O SL Corments:
O O
PrWed 10/1497 4.43.09 PM Page 2 of 2
NDttheast Utilities ICAVP DR N3. DR MP3 0241 MillstDne Unit 3 : Discrepancy Report O
Q Review Group: System DR VAllo Rev6ew Elemord: System Desgn PotentialOphe' 4tylasue Dioc6p46ne: Mechancei Design Discrepancy Type: calcunston Ow
,,,g-Gyotem/ Process: QSs ~
NRC Signincance level: 4 Date faxed to NU:
Date Published:
DiscroPency: Missing Minimum Wall Calculations Desenpuon: RFI MP3 522 requested ail OSS Minimum Wall Calculations, Response M3 IRf2 00505 Indicales that all the RSS calculations are being provided, Minimum wall calculations for sizes 10" and under are not available except for line 3QSS 008-42 2 and 30 SS 750-803 2. Nor are calculations available for the following lines:
12" . Line No. 1,24,20,35 and 41 14" . Une No. 21 The missing 'Alculations cover the cross-tie lines, the Suction lines for PLS from the RWST, the lines from the pump to containment, branch lines to the individual spray headers and the spray headers, Reyww Valid inval6d Needed Date
/'s initiator: Langel, D.
@ Q VT Lead: Nort, Anthony A Q 10/1197 i
O O O 10/12S7 VT Mgt: Schopfer, Don K O O O of'S7 IRC Chmn: Singh, Anand K Q O O $0/5'S7 D.ie:
INVALID:
Date:
RESOLUTION:
Previously identined by NUT Q Yes #1 No Review initiator: Langet, D.
VT Lead: Nort, Anthony A O O G VT Mgri Schopfer, Don K IRC Chmn: Singh, Anand K Date:
sL Comrtwnts:
O G
Printed 10/1497 4 39.32 PM Page 1 of 1
Northeast Utilities ICAVP DR No. DR MP3 0309 Millstone Unit 3 Discrepancy Report Revtew Group: System DR VALID nc w Elernenu system Dosagn Potentlel Operabilety issue Disc 6phne:I & C Design o'n pency Types coloulation Q g, systenvProcess: Osi, 43 y, NRC significance level: 4 Date faxed to NU:
Dale Putdehed:
Descrepancy: Calculation Discrepancy . 3451801 1231E3, Rev 0 D*ecrtpoon: Design inputs for RWST Level Indicators 30SS'Ll930 Ll931 Ll932, Ll933 on page 4 of Appendix A appear to be inconsistent with loop schematics 30SS 930 2, Rev 2,9312, Rev 2,932, Rev 2,933, Rev 3; calculation shows 4 20 mA: schematics show 010 Vdc.
Design inputs for Mainboard Recorder 3QSS LR930 on page 6 of Appendix A appear to be inconsistent with loop schematics 3OSS 9301, Rev 2,9311, Rev 2; calculation shows 4 20 mA:
schematics show 010 Vdc.
Design inputs for Computer Points on page 7 of Appendix A appear to be inconsistent with loop schematics 3QSS 9301, Rev 2,931 1, Rev 2,932, Rev 2; calculation shows 4 20 mA:
duiemulics t,huw 010 Voc.
O Design outputs for Signal Converters 30SS*LY930A,931 A on V page 9 of Appendix A appear to be inconsistent with loop schematics 30SS 930-2, Rev 2,9312, ReV 2; calculation shows (-1) . ( 5) Vde: schematics show 4 20 mA.
On page 3 of calculation,30SS*LQY 930, 931, .932 933, LY.
930, 930A, 931, 932 should be LQY930,931,932,933, LY930,930A,931,932 to be consistent with MP3 Instrument tagging convention 3QSS*LY.932 is shown twice.
30SS*LY931 A appears to be missing, Appendix A is referred to as Attachment A in Table of Contents on page 4.
On page 5 of Appendix A, mark numbers 3QSS*Ll930,931 should be 30SS*Ll930A, 931 A to agree with loop schematics 3QSS-930-2, Rev 2,9312, Rev 2.
Review Valid involki Needed Date inittetor: Pinelas, H.
VT Lead: Nort, Anthony A Q Q Q 9/2597 Q Q Q 1o/7/97 VT Mgr: Schopfer Don K IRC Chrnn: Singh, Anand K Q Q Q 1of1&S7 O O O 10S7 Dei.:
INVAUD:
O RESOLUTION:
PnntedtWf'C774U APWI"7 Page 1 of 2
Northeast Utilities ICAVP DR No. DR-MP3 0309 Millstone Unh 3 Discrepancy Report rreymussy mommeo oy nur v Tes ? > No Review Acceptable Ncd Acceptatde Needed Date inMw M VT Lead: Nort, Anthony A VT Mgra schopfer. Don K O IRC Ctwnni Singh, Anand K Date:
8L Conenents:
O O
Pnnted 10/1497 4 42.04 PM Page 2 of 2
_ __ u_ _ _ _ . . _ . _ _ ~ _ . . . _ __ - _ --
Northeast Utilities ICAVP DR No. DR-MP3-0316 wilstone Unit 3 Discrepancy Report V Rev6ew Group: syotem onyAug Rev6ew Element: system Design DisciplW Peng Due Pottuti(Operabihty issue Discrepancy Type: Calculaton ' n ' Y
SystenvProcess: sWP t No NRC signancance level: 3 Dde FW to NU' Date Publ6shed:
06screpancy: Operating temperature used in stress analysis is not consistent with current stress data package Ducr6ption: In the process of reviewing the following documents, (1) Calculation 12179 NP(F) 725-XD, Rev 3, CCN #1,4/20/93 (2) Stress data package calculation SDP.SWP 01370M3, Rev 10,5/23/97 we noted the following discrepancy; Gackground:
Pipe stress snalysis calculation (1) for lines 3-SWP-750-255 3,3-SWP 279 3 and 3 SWP 2814 is based on a maximum operating temperature of 160 deg F.
According to the stress data package (2), under operating condition 14, the operating process temperature for lines 3 SWP-Os 750 255-3,3 SWP 279 3 and 3 SWP 2814 is 165 deg F.
Condition 14 is described as follows: Four hours after a Containment isolation Phase-B (CIB) signal, reactor plant component cooling must be re-established and the Post Accident Sample System (PASS) is in service and can be utilized to '
obtain a post accident sample. To provide flow to the post accident sample cooler, valves 3SWP'V839 & V842 are opened.
Inlet temperature for the cooler is 75 deg F and outlet temperature is 165 deg F.
For the 165 deg F maximum operating temperature, thermal expansion stresses will exceed ASME Code class 2 &3 allowable for Eqn.11 by 2.6% ,
Discrepancy:
The operating temperature used in calculation (1) has not been updated to be consistent with the latest revision of the stress data package (2),
Review VWid invahd Needed Date init6ator: Patel, Ramesh.D G O O iu2,97
/T Lead: Nerl, Anthony A y Q g 10".,97 VT Mgr: schopfer, Don K Q Q [ 1o/1197 IRC Chmn: singh, Anand K Q O O 10/1'S7 h Date:
INVALID:
Printed 1o/1497 4 43 49 PM Page 1 of 2
4 Northeast Utilities ICAVP DR No. DR MP3 0316 Millstone Unit 3 Discrepancy Report O Date:
RESOLUTION:
Pievio.ssly identefled by NU7 Q Yes et No Rev6ew Acceptable Not Acceptable Nooded Da'.e VT Lead: Nort, Anthony A VT Mgr. Schopfer, Don K 1RC Chmn: Singh, Anand K g
Date:
SL Comment 9:
O O
Pnnted 10/1497 4 4400 PM Page 2 of 2
Northeast Utilities ICAVP DR No. OR MP3 0320 Millstone Unit 3 Discrepancy Report Rev6ew Group: Confguraten DR VALID Rev6ew Element: System inbineten p
Diecipiene: Piphg Otsgr.
Discrepancy Type:instainetni waernentaten i Ow SystenvProcess: SWP (g-g NRC Sigmf6cance level: 4 Date faked to NU:
Date Published:
Discrepancy: Walkdown Discrepancy for Service Water Supply to Water Treatment at the Pumphouse Descripuon: The following discrepancy item was found during the walkdown of the piping and mechanical equipment of the SWP Scope items in the pumphouse:
1, une 3 WTC 003-42 3 which includes the isolation valves to the SWP was included in the SWP walkdown Scope up to the isolation valves This line requires insulation per spec SP ME.
691 but was venfied to not have insulation.
Review Valid invalid Needed Date inttletor: Reed, J. W.
O O O 9/27/97 VT Lead: Nort, Anthony A g [ ] 10/2/97 VT Mgt: Schopfer, Don K O O O 10/1397 IRC Chmn: bingn, Anand K O Q Q 10/1497 Date:
Os INVALID:
Date:
RESOLUTION:
Previously identified by NU7 Q Yes t No Review Acceptable Not Acceptable Needed Date initiator: (none)
VT Lead: Nort, Anthony A VT Mgri Schopfer, Don K IRC Chmn: Singh, Anand K Date:
SL Comments:
O U
Pnnted 10/1497 4 44 48 PM Page 1 of 1
Northeast Utilities ICAVP DR No. DR MP3 0321 Mii' stone Unit 3 Discrepancy Report
(_ Revtew Group: Contguraten DR VAUD Review Element: System inatolisten Nacipline: P eng % Potent 6al Operablisty leaue Discrepancy Type: Installaton imp 4ementaten Q Y" systenvProcese: SWP @ No NRC significance level: 4 Dale faxed to NU Date Putd6shed:
Noctopency: Walkdown discrepancies for the SWP in the Pumphouse D*ecription: The following discrepancy items were found during the walkdown of the piping and mechanical equipment of the SWP in the Pumphouse:
- 1. Lines 3 SWP 00319 3,3 SWP 003 20 3,3 SWP.003 202 3, and 3 SWP 003 248-3 are not insulated as required by spec. SP.
ME 691 and no work in progress tag observed in the area,
- 2. Lines 3 SWP 002 23 3,3 SWP 003 213,3 SWP 003-203 3, and 3 SWP 003-22 3 are not insulated as required by spec, SP.
ME 691 and no work in progress tag observed in the area.
- 3. Valves 3SWP*VS,3SWP'MOV102A (*V8) and 3SWP*V7 are not insulated and no work in progress tag observed in the area.
1
- 4. Line 3-SWP 003 213 contains a flanged connection about 6 O in, from pipe support PSR036 that is not shown on isometric drawing Cl SWP 248 Sht 4 Rev 8.
- 5. Line 3-SWP 00212 3 insulation is not Type J as required per spec SP ME 691 and no work in progress tag was observed in the area.
The following material condition items were found during the walkdown of the piping and mechanical equipment of the SWP in the Pumphouse:
- 1. Pumps 3SWP'P1 A and 3SWo*% . .ls showleakage.
- 2. Pipe support H002 on isometric drawing CP 319703 exhibits severe rust and degmdation.
- 3. Strainer 3SWP*STP1C top shaft seal and top cover flange shows leakage and et osion,
- 4. Valves 3SWP*V969,*V972 and 'V1 flanges and bolts are rusted, 5, Lines 3 SWP 003-237 4 and 3 SWP-003-258 4 have insulation that is crushed from the 45 degree elbows to the wall penetration, Review Valid invalid Needed Date initiator: Reed, J. W.
\ Q Q Q 10697 VT Lead: Nort, Anthony A y [ [ 1Q7/97 VT Mgt: schopfer. Don K Printed 10/1497 4 as 35 PM Q O O 10/ SS7 Page 1 of 2
. -..?-.--.. - - - - - . - - - . - - - - - - - - - - . . - - - - - - - - - --- - - - - - - -
Northeast Utilities ICAVP DR No. DR MP3 0321_
Millstone Unit 3 Discrepancy Report IRC Chmn: Singh, Anars ' K g g g 1(y1497 INVAUD: "
Date:
RESOLUTION:
Prev 6ously identined by NU? O Yee Si No Rev6ew Acceptable Not Acceptable Needed Date init6ator (none)
VT Lead: Nort, Ardhony A O O VT Mgri Schopfer Don K O O IRC Chann' $1ngh, Anand K =
Date:
SL Cortunents:
O O
Printed 10/1497 4 45.46 PM Page 2 of 2 l
Northeast Utilities ICAVP DR No. DR-MP3-0322 Millstone Unit 3 Discrepancy Report Review oroup: contoursion DR VAuD Review Element: 4Stn instelieten oiecipiin.: rm o.,n Potential Operatuaty issue Discrepancy Type
- Instdaten implementsten o y,,
systenvProcess: $WP 4 y,
~
NRC SigntAcance level: 3 Date faxed to NU:
Date Published:
D6ect:;:xvi Walkdown discrepancy for SWP in the Pumphouse
Description:
The following discrepancy item was found during the walkdown of the piping and mechanical equipment of the SWP in the Pumphouse:
- 1. Pipe support H007 on isometric drawing CP 319703 (part of the 10% support sample) and shown on drawing BZ 19R 153 Rev i is a dead weight support for valve 3SWP'V99 motor-operator but there is a 1/32 in, gap between the suppod and the valve operator and hence it is not providing support.
Rev6.w Valid Invei6d Needed Date initiator: ReaJ, J. W.
O O O atas ,7 VT Lead: Nort, Anthony A VT Mgr schopfer. Don K O O O 10/2/87 Q Q Q 10/11,7 1RC Chnw singh, Anand K O O O 10/1'S7 O
Date:
INVAUD:
Date:
RESOLUTION:
Provtously identifled by NU7 O Yee 'e) No Review initiators (none) Acc 5 6 NW Acce@ Needed M VT Lead: Nerl, Anthony A O O O VT Mge: Schopfer, Don K O O 1RC Chmn: sugh, Anand K Date:
SL Comments:
c O
Med 10/1497 4 46:35 PM (
page1 og 1
Northeast Utilities ICAVP DR No. DR-MP3 0330 MillstDne Unit 3 Discrepancy Report O r P s- D VA D Diecip6&ne: Piping Deelg" Potenuel Operetniity lasue Discreper *y Type: Caiculeuon .
Ow SysterrWProcess: Rss 4 -
NRC signtAcance levet: 3 Date FAXW to NU:
Date Published:
Descrepency: jnconsistencies in the seismic evaluation of spray nozzle piping D*ecnpuon: During review of the following calculations (i) 12179 NP(F) 798 XD Rev 2, CCN 1 (ii) 12179 NP(F) 842 XD Rev 2, CCN 1 (iii) 12179 NP(B) X7912 Rev 1, (iv) 12179-NP(B) X7918 Rev 1.
(v) 12179-NP(B).X7900 Rev 1.
we noted the following dis:repancies:
Background:
QSS and RSS spray nozzles are cantilevered from the respective ring headers, and are not supported by the containment building structure. Therefore, these spray nozzles will be subjected to the ring header accelerations and not the building structure accelerations.
/^
l Discrepancy:
- 1. QSS spray nozzles are modeled and evaluated with the ring header piping in calculation (v). According to the ring header calculation (v), the spray nozzle calculation (I) has been superseded by (v). However, calculation (i) has not been voided, and is still active.
- 2. For the RSS spray nozzles, seismic response spectra cusves used in the spray nozzle calculation (ii) are not the same as those used in the ring header calculations [(111) and (iv)]. Fluid translent time history accelerations have not been considered in the evaluation of the spray nozzle piping. Acceleration 'g' valucs used for evaluating the spray nozzle piping are much lower than the ring header accelerations.
The ring header calculations ((lii) and (iv)] generate acceleration values for the evaluation of the decoupled spray nozzle lines.
But the acceleration values have not been used in the spray nozzle calculation (ii).
Review Valid invalid Needed Date initiator: Jain. R. C.
VT Lead: Neri, Anthony A Q Q Q 10 S 97 VT Mgr: schopfer. Don K G O O 5o'16S7 Q Q Q 10/1197 IRC Chmn: singh. Anand K Q Q Q 10/1497 s Date:
INVAUD:
Printed 10/1497 4 4729 PM Page 1 of 2
Northeast Utilities ICAVP DR No. DR MP3-0330 Millstone unn 3 Discrepancy Report Dele:
RESOLUTION:
Prevlously identafled by NU7 V Yes 9' No 7'" ~
Review Acceptatde Not Acceptable Needed Dea inM6etors (none)
VT Lead: Nort, Anthony A O O O VT Mgri Schopfer. Don K O O O IRC Chmn: Singh, Anand K O O -
O O .O SL Cornmords:
O O
Printed 10/1497 4 47.39 PM P of 2
Northeast Utilities ICAVP DR No. DR MP3 0335 wiistone unn 3 Discrepancy Report Review Group: System DR VALID
.- e- s -
Dl444ne: Stru:tural Deegn . _ e . ,,ee -
Discrepe9?/1/Pe: Celculaten Q y,,
SystemPtocoes: SWP (#)No NRC Algnancancelevel:4 Date FAKod to NU:
Date Published:
Disc 7Pency: Pipe Support Calculation Discrepancies D**cr5uon: We have reviewed Pipe Support Calculation no.NP(F) ZO19R.
014 H002,ReV.7.
Based upon the results of this review,the following discrepancies have been noted:
- 1) On page no.SA.the applied pipe support loads per the la x.st revision are:
Fy = .226# and Fz = 35#.
The applied loads used in the design load input for the computer model on page no 20 are:
Fy = 180# and Fz = 30#,
Since the latest loads are higher than those used in the analysis, load comparison on page no.6A is not valid,
- 2) Base plate at node no.1(member no.1) has not been p addressed in the calculation.
V Review Vead inveild Needed Date initietor Kleio, N y Q Q 1W397 VT Land: Nort, Antvy A O O O '*SS7 VT Mgt: Schopfer, Don K g Q Q 1o/1397 IRC Chmn.' Singh, Atiend K Q O O 'o'i'S7 Date:
INVALed; i
Date:
RESOLUTION:
Previously identined by Nu? (,) Yes ,ei No Review Ar.coptable Not Acceptable Needed Date VT Lead: Neri, Ant %ny A O O O vT ugn schopfer Don K
, IRC Chmn: Singh, Anand K Date:
] ] ]
g SL Comments:
O Printed 10/1497 4.48.10 PM Pege 1 of 1
Northeast Utilities ICAVP DR No. DR MP3-0336 MillstDn Unit 3 Discrepancy Report '
\ -
Review Group: System DR VALID Review Clernent: System Desgn Discipline: StrucNtal Desgn
,,_ p ,,
Discrepancy Type: Calculatm O va Systa=VProcess: QSS g
~
NRC signifncance leget: 4 Date faxed to NU:
Date Published:
D6screpancy: Pipe Support Calculation Discrepancy Desertptic*: We have reviewed Pipe Support Calculation no. NP(F)-ZO79R.
753 H003,Rev.1, Based upon the results of this review,the following discrepancy has been noted:
Local stresses in the in-place steel beam at the pipe support attachment location have not been addressed in the analysis. Local stress check is required per Design Criteria Document NETM-27,Rev.1.
Rev6ew Valid Inveiwi Needed Date initiator: Kla'c, N i
O O O s/2as7 VT Lead: Nerl, Anthony A g Q O 1o/1/97 VT Mgr: Schopfer, Don K IRC Chmn: Singh, Anand K
@ r_"l [ 10/13.97 0 0 1o/1'S7 Date:
INVALID:
Date:
RESOLUTION:
Previously identifled t'y NU? U Yes '4) No Review initiator: (none)
VT Lead: Nert, Anthony A VT Mgr: Schoofer, Don K IRC Chmn: Singh, Anand K
. -e SL Cormen's:
d Pnnted 1G/1497 4.49 o2 PM Page1 or 1
Nor.heast Utilities ICAVP DR No. DR-MP3-0347 MillstDne Unit 3 Discrepancy Report Review Group: system DRVED Review Element: System Desgn Diecipline: Structurel Design Potential OperaN A, Issue Discrepancy Type: Cele 4d eten Q yes ,
System / Process: SWP @) No NRC S'gnificance
. level: 4 Date faxed to NU:
Date Published:
Discrepancy: Pipe support calculation NP(F) Z79D-454 discrepancy Desertption: We have reviewed the Pipe Support Calculation 12179-NP(F).
Z79D-454, Rev.3, CCN #1 and note the following discrepancies.
- 1. On page 28 the Fx load component for load cases OBEl and SSEl is not based on the latest load from Pipe Support Summary (page 24). The latest loads, are, Fx=1877# (not Fx=1287#) for OBEl and Fx=2105# (not Fx=1863#) for SSEl.
- 2. On page 48, moment MYL should be 3555 in4 (not 6185 in4) and moment MZL should be 29584 in4 (not 26928 in4). This will change the member stresses.
- 3. On page 49, moment Mc should be 3555 ir4 (not 6185 in4) and moment ML should be 29584 in4 (not 11886 in4). This will
' change the weld size Ratio to 1.46.
Rev6ew A Valid invalid Needed Date k] Initiator Petel, A.
O O O 10/SS7 VT Lead: Neri, Anthony A y [ Q 1a7/g7 VT Mgr: schopfer, Don K IRC Chmn: singh, Anand K O O O 1o/1SS7 O O O 'oS7 Date:
INVALID:
Date:
RESOLUTION:
Previously identified by NU? O Yes- @ No Review Acceptable Not Acceptable Needed Date VT Lead: Nert, Anthony A VT Mgt: Schopfsr, Don K 3 IRC Chrnn: singh, Anand K Dete:
sL Comments:
Pnnted 10/1497 4 40-47 PM Page 1 of 1 l
c .. .. . - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ . _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ . ._
Northeast Utilities ICAVP DR No. DR MF3 0362 Millstone Unit 3 Discrapancy Report Revtew Group: ConAguraten DR VAL 40 Review Element: System Desgn Discipun.: si-ine.i Dawn Pdentia w m ylu ue Olse.epancy Type: Drawing o vee SystenVProcess: QSS @) No NRC Signincance levet: 4 Date faxed to NU:
Date Published:
Descrepency: Drawing Discrepancies Ducription: 1. Conduit Support Logs (CSLs) 12179-FSK YD-035 Rev. 2 and YD-043 Rev.1 A show conduit 3CC9100K1 as 2 inch which is consistent with the field installed condition. The Cable and Raceway Program (T302) indicates the conduit is 1 inch diameter.
- 2. Drawing EE SSS, Rev. 3 shows conduit 3CX910NK2 connected to 3QSS TE38, Per the Cable and Raceway Program (TSO2) and the Installed condition, the conduit number is 3CX910NL,
- 3. Drawing EE-SSS, Rev. 3 shows conduit 3CX910NK4 connected to 30SS-TE23. Per the Cable and Raceway Program (TSO2) and the installed condition, the conduit number is 3CX910NL1, Review Valid invalid Needed Date g initiator: Sarwr, T. L 3 Q Q W30S7 VT Lead: Neri, Anthony A O O O 'o/257 VT Mgr: Schopfer. Don K G O O 10/13/87 IRC Chmn: Singh, Anand K Q Q Q 10/1497 -
D.i.:
INVALID:
Date:
RESOLUTION:
Previously identified by NU7 Q Yes 8 No Rev6ew Acceptable Not Acceptable Needed Date VT Lead: Nerl, Anthony A VT Mgt: Schopfer, Don K LRc Chmn: Singn, Anand K Date:
sL Comments:
O Prtnted 10/1497 4.50:34 PM Page 1 of 1
Northeast Utilities ICAVP DR No. DR-MP3 0358 Millstone Unit 3 Discrepancy Report g
\ Revtew Oroup: Contguratxwt DRVALIO Reh EW: S#ern W Potential Operandesty lesue Discip6ne: Electncal Desen Discrepancy Type: DW O v.
SysterrWProcess: sWP (97
~ No NRC signincance level: 4 Date faxed to NU:
Does Putdished Discrepency: Drawing Discrepancies
Description:
- 1. Vendor drawing 2474.030-624160 Rev. D, with no outstanding CCDs lists the junction boxes forinstruments 3SWP*RE60A and B ss 3SWP'JB60A and B. The TSO2 listing and wiring diagrams (EE 6AV, Rev. 4 and EE-6AX Rev. 4) show the boxes to be 3SWP'JBRE60A and B.
- 2. Wiring diagrams EE-6AV, Rev. 4 and EE-6AX Rev. 4 for instruments 3SWP*RE60A and B show cables 3RMSNOX405 and 3RMSNPX405 from the instruments to junction / terminal boxes. These are vendor supplied cables for the connection of the instruments to the vendor supplied boxes. The field cable is connected to the terminal boxes. These cable numbers are not listed in the Circuit and Raceway Program (TSO2).
- 3. Drawing EE 32C Rev.11 (F 10) shows junction boxes 3JB*9951 and 3JB*9952 in the pit containing radiation elements O 3SWP*RE60A and B. These box numbers are not listed in the V Circuit and Raceway Program (TSO2). Drawing EE 32C provides reference to drawing EE SSS (Rev. 3; K 8) which shows these boxes to be 3SWP'JBRE60A and B. This is consistent with the wiring diagrams EE-6AV, Rev 4 and EE-6AX Rev. 4 for instruments 3SWP*RE60A and B.
Rev6ew Vaud invalid Needed Date Initiator: server, T. L.
8 O O S/30/S7 VT Lead: Nen. Anthony A
@ Q Q 1o/297 VT Mgr: schopfer. Don K IRC Chmn: singh. Anand K
@ Q O 1o/1397 8 O O 10/1'57 Date:
INVALID:
Date:
RESOLUTION:
Previously identified by NU7 Q Yes @ No Review Initiator: (none)
VT Lead: Nort, Anaiony A VT Mgr: schopfer. Don K IRC Chmn: singh. Anend K O' sL Conwnents:
Date:
Printed 10/1497 4 51:24 PM Page1 of 1
_._ i_._.____ __ -- ----- -- - --
Northeast Utilities ICAVP DR No. DR MP3-0362 Millstone unM 3 Discrepancy Report
( Review Group: System DRVAUD R h E h :S W W Pote n. . : %ebility issue Diecipime: Ptping Design Discrepancy Type: Calculeton gy System / Process: SWP O No NRC Signincance level: 3 Date faxed to NU:
Date Published:
Discrepancy: Bellow Loads have been not qualified and documented.
' D*ec51Pt6on: It was noted during the review of Calc,12179 NP(B)-X1907, REV.4, CCN #1 and Calc.12179-NP(B) X1908, REV. 3, CCN
- 1 for SWP and Calc 12179-NP(F) X7923 REV.1 CCN # 5 for RSS that these calculations contain an unverified assumption.
The expansion joints have not been qualified for the new displacements and loadings, Review Valid Invalid Needed Date Inulator: Singn, R.
Q [ Q 10/10/97 VT Lead: Nort, Anthony A Q Q Q 10/1197
- VT Mgr: Schopfer Don K O O O 10/1'S7 1RC Chmn: Singh, Anand K Q Q Q 10/1497 Date:
INVAUD:
O RESOLUTION' Date:
Previously identifled by NU7 O Yes @ No Review Acceptable Not Acceptable Needed Date VT Lead: Nort, Anthony A VT Mgt: Schoofer, Don K IRC Chmn: Singh, Anand K Date:
sL Comments:
Prwed 10/1497 4 5211 PM Page 1 of 1
Northeast Utilities ICAVP DR No. DR MP3 0366 MillstDne Unit 3 Discrepancy Report Review Group: systam DR VALID Review Element: system Design Diecipline: Piping Design Potential Operabiiny issue Discrspancy Type: Calcutsuon Q yee System / Process: sWP @ No NRC Significance level: 4 Date faxed to NU:
Date Published:
Discrepancy: Density of Fiberglass (J) insulation used in stress analysis is inconsistant with cited reference
Description:
In the proess of reviewing the following documents, (i) Pipe Stress Calculation 12179-NP(B) X1900 Rev. 3 CCN's 1 to 3 (ii) Pipe Stress Calculation 12179-NP(B)-X53900, Rev,5 we noted the following discrepancy:
In pipe stress analysis calculations (i) and (ii), the density of Fiberglass insulation Type J is specified for some lines as 4 lbs/cft, and for others as 5.25 lbs/cft According to the reference cited in the calculations, the density should be 5.25 lbs/cft. No justification is provided for the use of the lower (4 lbs/cft) density, Review Valid invalid Needed Date q Initiator: Prakash, A.
@ Q Q 1o297 VT Lead: Nort, Anthony A g Q O 1o/3,97 VT Mgt: schopfer, Don K O O O 10/1'S7 IRC Chrnn: singh, Anand K
@ Q Q 10/1497 Date:
INVAUD:
Date:
RESOLUTION:
Previously identified by NU7 O Yes @ No Review Acceptable Not Acceptable Needed Date VT Lead: Nort, Anthony A VT Mgr: Schopfer, Don K IRC Chrnn: singh, Anand K Date:
sL Comments:
N 4
V Pnnted 10/1497 4 53'o1 PM Page1of 1 l
y,, _--_,.-mr e q,.m.m=r w e'amak.umm.N* mew - eustWi.sh
- Northeast Utilities ICAVP DR No. DR MP3-0390 Millstone Unit 3 Discrepancy Report Review Group: System DR VALlO Diecipline: Mechencal Des.gn Potential Operability leeue Discrepancy Type: Calculatm O Yes System / Process: SWP g
NRC Signifk.ence levet: 4 Date faxed to NU: U Date Published:
D6screpency: Design input document to calculation 96-001 h incorrectly superseded.
Desertption: Calculation 96-001 ls the latest Proto Flo hydriulic model of the Service Water System. The design input document to this calculation is Proto-Power Calculation 94-065. Per NU document M3-IRF 00478, calc. 94 065 is superseded by calc.96-001. Calculation 94-065 was incorrectly superseded since it is used for design input to calculation 96-001.
Review Vet 6d invalid Needed Date in6tietor: Dionne, B. J.
VT Leed: Nerl, Anthony A Q Q Q 10&97 VT Mgr: Schopfer, Don K 8 O O 0/a/97
@ [ Q 10/1497 IRC Chwr Singh, Anand K g Q Q 10/14W Dete.
INVALID:
Date:
RESOLUTION Previously identifled by Nu? U Yes @ No Rev6ew initiator: (none)
VT Lead: Neri, Anthony A VT Mgt: Schopfer, Don K IRC Chmn: Singh, Anand K Liste:
SL Cornments:
O Printed 10/1497 4 53.50 PM Page 1 of 1
Northeast Utilities ICAVP DR No. DR-MP3 0391 Millstone Unit 3 Discrepancy Report O <
h Review Group: Systern DR VALID Diecipline: Mechancel Design Potential Operability issue Discrepancy Type: Calculation O Ya SystenvProcess: SWP g
NRC Significance level: 4 Date faxed to NU:
Date Published:
Discrepency: Design input document to calculations could not be found in the NU system.
Description:
Letter NEU-91650, Rey,1 dated 1 17 92 is referenced as a design input to calcuations 90-069-1116-M3 and calculation FSE!SS-NEU-1964. This document was deemed as not in the NU system by M3-IRF 00381, Review Valid invalid Needed Date initiator: Dionne, B. J.
O O O 1o*S7 VT Lead: Neft, Anthony A g Q Q 10/7/97 VT Mgr: Schopfer, Don K G O O 10/1a7 L9C Chmn: Singh, Anand K G O O 10/1a7 Dete:
INVALID:
Date:
RESOLUTION:
Previously identifled by NU7 Q Yes @ No Review Acceptable Not Acceptable Needed Date
' bh M VT Lead: Nort, Antnony A VT Mgt: Schopfer, Don K IRC Chmn: Singh, Anand K Date:
SL Cornments:
Printed 10/1497 4 54 42 PM Page 1 of 1 e
_. n__. _ _ _ _ _ - - - _. -
Northeast Utilities ICAVP DR No. DR MP3 0078 Millstone unit 3 Discrepancy Report Review Group: System M INVALID Review Element: System Design Potent 6el Operability issue Discipiene. m Design Y
Descrepancy Type: Ucenomg Docurnent System / Process: Qs3 @ No NRC Significance level: 4 Date faxed to NU:
Date Putsshed.
D6screpancy: Minimum elapsed time from LOCA to receipt of RWST low-3 level signal is reported at 33 & 20 min.
Deecription: Licensing document discrepancies exist with respect to the minimum elapsed time from a LOCA to receipt of the RWST low-low-low level signal.
Minimum Elapsed Time Reference (minutes)
FSAR Sec 6.3.2.8 33 3DBS-NSS 002 20 Affected System Requirements:
QSS-265
(
I, QSS-405 Rev6ew Valid inve86d Needed Date initiator: Feingold, D. J O G O o'3/87 VT Lead: Nort, Anthony A O O O or7/87 VT Mqr: schopfer. Don K O Q O 1o/12S7 IRC Chmn: singh, Anand K O G O SS7 Date: g/4/97 INVAllO: The two referenced documents are not in conflict.
The Design Basis Summary 3DBS-NSS-002 specifies " A minimum of twenty (20) minutes must be availab;a from the start of flow from the RWST until the low-low level setpoint is reached."
The FSAR states " the minimum elapsed time from a LOCA to the receipt of the RWST low-low level signal has been calculated to be 33 minutes."
Because 33 minutes is greater than 20 minutes, the 'as designed' syst3m meets the minimum design basis requirements.
Date:
RESOLUTION:
Previously identified by NU? O Yes @ No Vh ACCoptable Not Acceptable Needed Review Date F DJ vr m. ~ i m,- , O O G __
Printed 1o/1497 4:19:53 PM Page 1 of 2
l '
l -
Northeast Util;tles ICAVP DR No. DR-MP3 0078 Millstone Unit 3 Discrepancy Report
' f , K IRC Chmn: T r.*, Anand K Date:
SL Comments:
O O
Printed 10/1497 4.20:01 PM Page 2 of 2
Northeast Utilities ICAVP DR No. DR MP3 0171 Millstone Unit 3 Discrepancy Report Revtew Group: sptom DR INVAllD Potwiuol Operability issue Diecipune: Electrical Design Discrepancy Type: Licenem0 Document +*
O Ya Systendrocess: F.ss (M No NRC Signincance levet: 4 Date faxed to NU:
Date Published:
Discrepancy: Descrepancy with respect to timing of Containment Recirculation Spray Pump autostart Descripuon: Design basis summary requirement for containment recirculation spray pumps is not in agreement with logic drawings.
Design Basis Summary Paragraph 12.2,6 states: ' Containment rec!rculation spray pumps shall start automatically 660 seconds
+/ a timer tolerance of twenty (20) seconds) following receipt of a CDA (Containment Depressurization Actuation} signal. Note that this start time is subject to change due to 14.1.8 (pending (evision in calculation US(B)-273),"
The logic drawings indicate that pumps A & B will start in 650 seconds and pumps C & D will start in 660 seconds.
Drawings reviewed, LSK 24-09.4Q Rev 09 Logic Diagram Emergency O Generator Load Sequence LSK 24-09.4R Rev 09 Logic Diagram Emergency Generator Load Sequence LSK 27-11 A Rev 09 Logic Diagram Containment Recirculation LSK 27-118 Rev 09 Logic Diagram Containment Recirculation Rev6ew Valki invaild Needed Date initiator: Wamer, l.
Q g Q 10497 VT Lead: Nort, Anthony A O O O 1o/S'87 VT Mgt: schopfer, Don K O O O IRC Chmn: singh, Anand K Q Q Q Date: 10/8/97 INVALID:
This discrepancy is defined as invalid because this issue was discussed as part of DR-MP3-0058, Date:
RESOLUTION:
Previously identmed by NU? Q Yes @ No Review inittstor: Wamer, l.
v7 e ..,e. ns an.,uom a O O O Prtnted 10/1497 4.20:44 PM Page 1 of 2
. ._,_L.____._.__. _._ _ __ __ ._ . _ _ .
Northeast Utilities ICAVP DR No. DR MP3-0171 Millstone Unit 3 Discrepancy Report Q . . . . . . . ~ , ~ - , -
VT Mgr: Schopfer, Don K g
O g g D
IRC Chmn: Singh, Anand K O Cate:
O O 5 SL Comments:
9 O
O Prtnted 10/1497 4:20:52 PM Page 2 of 2
Northeast Utilities ICAVP DR No. DR MP3-0210 Millstone Unit 3 Discrepancy Report ReviewGroup: System DRINV 6 Review Err ent: System Design D.ccl i*,ue: I & C Design Potentialoperabihty issue Discreper*cy Tyl* Drawng Q y,,
SystenVProcess: OSS @ No NRC Significance level: 4 Date faxed to NU:
Date Published:
Discrepancy: Drawing Discrepancy - Various Schematics Descripoon: Shields on the following cables appear to recuire grounding:
Cable Number Drawing (s) 31HC2NX901' 3QSS 023, Rev 4,040A, Rev 2, 0408, Rev 2 3CESNNX260 3QSS-023 Rev 4,032A, Rev 3 31HCENX925 3OSS-0271, Rev 2 31HC2NX91i 3QSS 0271, Rev 2 3lHCENX926 3OSS-0281, Rev 2 31HC2NX924 3QSS-028-1, Rev 2 31HC2NX942 3QSS-032A, Rev 3,0328, Rev 3 3CESNNX282 3QSS-0328, Rev 3 31HC2NX940 3QSS-054A, Rev 4, 0548, Rev 2 31HC2NX943 3QSS-056A, Rev 3,0568, Rev 2 SIMUZNAd35 3Q83 060, Kev 4 3tHC2NX939 3QSS-060, Rev 4 O'g This is to provide no se suppression for low signal level instrumentation cables, maltitain consistency with other cables of similar functions and utilize good engineering practice.
Review Valid Invelid Needed Date initiator: Pinetes, H-O G O 1oS'S7 VT Lead: Nort, Antnany A O O O to/SS7 VT Mgr: Schopfer, Don K Q Q Q IRC Chrnn: singh, Anand K O O O Date: 10/9/97 INVALID: Cab les contain multiple conductors. Individual pairs of conductors are not shielded. Each cable has an overall shield which is grounded to provide noise suppression. The drawings are correct, therefore there are no discrepancies.
Date:
RESOLUTION:
Previously identifled by NU7 U Yes @ No Review initletor: Pineles, H. **
Date:
SL Comments:
Printed 10/1447 4.21:37 PM Page 1 of 1
--l -
Northeast Utilities ICAVP DR No. DR-MP3-0221 Millstone Unit 3 Discrepancy Report Revtew Group: System DR INVAUD Discipline: I & C Design Potential OperetWlity issue Discrepancy Type: Drawing Om SystenVProcess: RSS @ No NRC Significance levet: 4 Date faxed to NU:
Date Pubashed.
Discrepency: Drawing Discrepancy- LSK 27-11H D**cr$Ption: On Logic diagram LSK-2711H, Rev 9, Miniflow Valve 3RSS*MOV38A can be opened by manually actuating the valve "Open/Close" Switch with Pump 3RSS*P1A not running or actuating the valve "Open/Cicse" Switch with Pump 3RSS*P1 A running and " Override" Switch actuated. The logic also applies to Miniflow Valve 3RSS*MOV38B and Pump 3RSS*P18. The logic should be revised to show that manual opening of the Miniflow Valve is independent of pump status.
Review Valid invalid Needed Date initiator: Pinetes, H.
VT Lead: Neri, Anthony A
[ @ Q 10/197 VT Mgr: Schopfer, Don K Q @ Q IoM97 IRC Chmn: Singh, Anand K O O O O O O Det*: 10/3/97 O
INVAUD: Further review indicates that Miniflow Valve ! **MOV38A, 388 can be opened or closed independent o. , rump 3RSS*P1 A,18 operating status. The drawing is correct, therefore tnere is no discrepancy.
Date:
RESOLUTION:
Previously identifled by NU7 Q Yes it) No Review initiator: Pinetes, H. *
sL Comments:
Pnnted 10/1497 4 2222 PM Page 1 of 1
Northeast Utilities ICAVP DR No. DR-MP3 0223 Millstone Unit 3 Discrepancy Report Review Group: System DR INVALID Review Element: System Design p ,
Discipline: I & C Design Discrepancy Type: Drawing Om '
System / Process: Rss @)
" No NRC Significance level: 4 Date faxed to NU:
Date Published:
Discrepancy: Drawing Discrepancy Various Schematics
Description:
Shieids on the following cables appear to be unnecessary:
Cable Number Drawing (s) 3CESNOX204 3RSS-022A 2, Rev 3,025A, Rev 2, 025C, Rev 2 3CEGNPX433 3RSS-0228-2, Rev 3,0258, Rev 2, 0250, Rev 2 3RSSAOX239 3RSS-038A, Rev 3 3RSSANX239 3RSS-038A, Rev 3 3RSSBPX239 3RSS-0388, Rev 3 3RSSBNX239 3RSS-0388, Rev 3 3CESNNX253 3RSS-040C, Rev 2 3CESNNX278 3RSS-040D, Rev 2 Undesignated
- 3RSS-049 Rev 4
- Wired to 3RSS-Ll49 O
V This is to provide noise suppression for low signal level instrumentation cables, maintain consistency with ott,er cables of similar functions and utilize good engineering practice.
Review Valid Invalid Needed Date Initiator: Pinelas, H.
O O O 10/S/S7 VT Lead: Nort, Anthony A VT Mgr: Schopfer, Don K Q @ Q 10/9/97 O O O IRC Chnin: Singh, Anand K Q Q Q Date: 10/g/97 INVALID: Cables contain multiple conductors. Individual pairs of conductors are not shielded. Each cable has an overall shield which is grounded to provide noise suppression. The drawings are correct, therefore there are no discrepancies.
Date:
RESOLUTION:
Previously identified by NU7 C) Yes @ No Review Initiator: Pinetes, H.
^#"* * ##* *
\ Date:
SL Comments:
Printed 10/1497 4M33 PM Page 1 of 1
- __ . . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ , _ _ _ ~ . _
Northeast Utilities ICAVP DR No. DR MP3-0231 Millstone unit 3 Discrepancy Report OV Review Group: System DR INVALIO Potential Operability lasue Discipiir,e: I f ^ r+ e Discrepancy Type: DrawtN SysterrWProcess: sWP O No NRC Significance level: 4 Date faxed to NU:
Date Published:
Discrepancy: Drawing Discrepancy LSK 9-10A H
Description:
Logic Diagram LSK 910A, Rev 12 for Pumps 3SWP'P1B and 3SWP*P1D and Logic Diagram LSK 910H, ReV 12 for Pumps 3SWP*P1 A and 3SWP*P1C show that the pumps will start on service water pump header A/B discharge pressure lo-lo; section 12.7.2.1 of the Design Basis Summary Document for the Service Water System,3DBS-BOP-001, Section 12.7.2.1 states "...which will start the standby SW pump if header pressure reaches the low-low setpoint." The Logic Drawings should be revised to show that a pump will start on low-low header only if it has been selected as the follow pump.
Review Valid invalid ..aeded Date Initiator: Pinoise. H.
VT Lead: Nort, Anthony A O O O 10'$ /S7 O O O 10'52S7 VT Mer; 3diopic, Uon -
IRC Chmn: singh, Anand K 0 0 0 O O O Date: 10/11/97 INVALID: One pump in train A (P1 A or P1C) and one pump in train B (P1B or P1D) are normally running to provide heat removal for non-safety loads. The operating pump is selected as the lead pump by setting the selector switch at the switchgear, thereby designating the other pump as the follow pump. A lo-lo header pressure signal will automatically start the follow pump as shown on the logic diagrams. Therefore, there is no discrepancy.
Date:
RESOLUTION Previously identified by NU? () Yes (9) No Review initiator: Pineles, H.
- **P *
sL Comments:
Prtnted 10/1497 4:24.29 PM Page 1 of 1 1
0
._ _ t_ _ __ ___ _ _ _ _ _ . _
Northeast Utilities ICAVP DR No DR-MP3-0350 Milistone Unit 3 Discrepancy Report
(,)/
( Review Group: sptem DR INVALID Review Element: System Design Potential OperabiHty lasue Discipline: Mechancal Design Discrepancy Type: Component Data 4 g, System / Process: Rs3 ~
NRC Significance level: 4 Date faxed to NU:
Date Published:
D6screpancy: FSAR Table 6.2-62, Figure 6.31 and Spec SP-ME-784 conflict on 3RSS*MOV20A,B,C,D design pressure.
Description:
FSAR Table 6.2-62 stater that the containment recirculation pump discharge valves are designed for 150 pounds. These valves are 3RSS*MOV20A,B,C,D according to P&lD EM 112C Revision 16.
According to valve design specification SP-ME 784 through Revision 2, valves 3RSS*MOV20A,B,C,D have a design pressure of 275 psig at 150 degrees Fahrenheit and a pressure rating class of 150 pounds.
According to FSAR Figure 6.3-1, the subject valves could experience a pressure and temperature as high as 206 psig and 182 degrees Fahrecheit, A valve design pressure of 150 psig is not sufficient to meet the expected opt; rating conditions. The pressure rating class and the design pressure do not have the same meaning.
Review Valid invalid Needed Date Instletor: Feingold, D. J.
O O O 10/13/S7 VT Lead: Neri, Anthony A O O O 10/15S7 VT Mgr: schopfer, Don K O O O IRC Chmn: singh, Anand K O O O Date: 10/13/97 INVALID: Whlie the statement in the FSAR could be written la a clearer manner, it is apparent that the statement is referTing to the valve pressure class and not to design pressure, Date:
RESOLUTION:
Previously identifled by NU? U Yes @ No Review g Acceptable Not Acceptable Needed Date VT Lead: Nort, Anthony A VT Mgr: schopfer, Don K IRC Chmn: singh, Anand K
. Date:
sL Comments:
O U
Printed 10/1497 4:25 43 PM Page 1 of 1
Northeast Utilities ICAVP DR No, DR-MP3-0376 Millstone Unit 3 Discrepancy Report
[O Q
Review Group; Operatens & Maintenance and Testing DR INVAllo Review Element: Correctrve Acton Process p
Discipline: Other Dicopancy Type: Correcttve Acton Om g
SysteinProcess: SWP ~
NRc Significance level: 4 Date faxed to NU:
Date Published:
Discrepancy: Inadequate documentation to verify Commitment close-out.
Descripuon: In their response to NRC's Generic Letter describing Service Water System Problems Affecting Safety Related Equipment (GL 89-13), Northeast Utilities (NU) committed to review Servica Water System maintenance practices, operating and emergency procedures, and training program, The objective of the review was to confirm that procedures and program are adequate to ensure safety related equipment will function as intended. In their response to the Request for information (RFI), which asked for documentation of the NU review, NU did not provide sufficient information to verify that the review satisfied the commltri.;nt.
The maintenance portion of the supplied documentation identified three periodic inspections, called PM's and made the statement tnat *Since the above PM's have beea generated, this item is complete.' No information was provided that indicated p what other surveillances/PM's were performed on the safety Q related equipment or what maintenance procedures were reviewed The Operations portion of the supplied documer,tation did not document the review of any alarm responses. Only three operating procedures were identified as having been reviewed.
No justification was provided why other procedures such as Control Room and Plant Equipment Rounds; Train A & B ESF with LOP Test (IPTE), or Operating Strategy for Service Water System at Millstone Unit 3 were not included in the review.
Additionalinfom1ation is needed to verify the close-out of the commitment to review Service Water System Maintenance practices and operating procedures as described in GL 89-13.
The following discrepancy was noted:
NU did not provide adequate documentation to complete the independent verification of the GL 89-13 Service Water System review.
Review Valid invalid Needed Date initiator: Spear, R.
VT Lead: Bass, Ken O O O 10/23'S7 Q g O 1o/13/97 VT Mgr: schopfer, Don K O O O IRC chmn: singh, Anand K O O O Date: 10/13/97 Pnnted 10/14'97 4 26:29 PPINVNE Page 1 of 2
Northeast Utilities ICAVP DR No. DR MP3-0376 Millstone Unit 3 Discrepancy Report O INVCD:
Based on NJS bi annual procedure review requirements, adequate documentation does exist to confirm that an adequate y
review of various Ser/ ice Water System operating, maintenance, and trainlug procedures has been completed.
Date:
RESOLUTION:
Previously identif6ed by NU? C) Yes @ No Review
,g Acceptable Not Acceptable Needed Date VT Lead: Bass, Ken O O O VT Mgr: Schopfer, Don K IRC Chmn: Singh, Anand K Date:
SL Comments:
O O
Pnnted 10/1N97 4 26.40 PM Page 2 of 2
I Northeast Utilities ICAVP DR No. DR-MP3-0407 Millstone Unit 3 Discrepancy Report O
(/ Review Group: System DR INVALID Discipline: I & C Design Potential Operability issue Discrepancy Type: Licensing Document ' Om SystenVProcess: QSS gg NRC Significance level: 4 Date faxed to NU:
Date Published:
Discrepancy: RWST level design does not agree with the requirements specified in the FSAR Descrigion: Per FSAR section 6.3.2.8 two of the four channels monitoring Refueling Water Storage Tank (RWST) level shall be recorded in the control room. See system requirements no REQ-MP3 0566.
A review of P&lD EM 115A, Rev,18, & test loop diagrams 3QSS-056A, Rev.3; SQSS-060, Rev,4; SQSS 930-1, Rev. 2; 30SS-930-2, Rev 2;3QSS-931-1, Rev.2; 3QSS-9312, Rev. 2; 3QSS-932, Rev 2; and 3QSS-933, Rev. 3 indicates that only one recorder namely 3QSS-LR930 (located at the control room pane MB2) has been provided.
Review Valid invalid Needed Date initiator: Hn$a, R.
O O O ' o'r VT Lead: Neri, Anthony A
[ g Q 10/i0,10 VT Mgt: Schopfer, Don K O O O IRC Chmn: Singh, Anand K O O O Date: 10/7/97 INVALID: Recorder 30SS-LR930 is a dual channel recoreder, accepting inputs from level transmitters 3QSS*LT930 & 3QSS*LT931.
Hence, the requirement of two recorders it satisfied in principal.
Date:
RESOLUTION:
Previously identified by NU7 O Yes @ No Review initiator: (none) ** Y ' **Y*
SL Comments:
9 Pnnted 1o/14/97 4 27;16 PM Page 1 of 1 i
i
1 l Northeast Utilities ICAVP DR No. DR-MP3-0414 Millstone Unit 3 Discrepancy Report g ,
Review Group: system DR INVALID Review Element: system Design Discipline: Environmnental Ouahreatm PotentialOperabifi" Msue w' Discrepancy Type: Component Data O vee .
systemProcess: Rss T No NRC Significance level: 4 Date faxed to NU:
Date Publistad:
Discrepancy: Component Data Sheet Discrepancy ;n Specification No.
2472.310-683 Descripuon: Millstone databases PDDS and PMMS state that the Procurement Specification No. for WEEDS RTDs No. 3RSS-TE28A,B,C,D is 2472.310-683. However, the review of the specification show that the Data Sheets for these RTDs are missing. The Review of Stone & Webster Engineering & Design Coordination Report (DCR) No. DCR-T-C-06646, dated 8/2/85 shows that, originally, the RTDs were purchased under the Spec.
No. 2472.310-379. Then the RTDs were re-tagged and assigned to the warehouse. Another set of RTDs, purchased per the Spec.
2472.310-683, was installed to replace the old RTDs, which were re-tagged as 3RSS-TE28A,B,C,D. The DCR instructed to revise both the procurement specification and the Operation and Maintenance Manual (OlM) for each affected specification. The revicw of the Specification 2472.310-683 shows that the addition of the new RTDs' Data Sheets for compor.ents 3RSS- s t p TE28A,B,C,D did not take place.
Q Also, The review of Operation and Maintenance Manual No. OlM.
683-1 A, dated 6/1983 shows that the components are not listed as instructed in D*R T-C-06646.
Review Valid invalid Needed Date initiator: Yassin. s. O g Q 1o/1397 VT Lead: Neri, Anthony A O O O 10'iSS7 VT Mgr: schopfer, Don K O O O IRC Chmn: singh, Anand K O O O Date: 10/13/97 INVALID: Further review the staus of Stone & Webster Engineering &
Design Coordination Report (DCR) No. DCR T-C-06646, dated 8/2/1985 shows that it is UNINCORPORATED (OPEN).
Date:
RESOLUTION:
Previously identified by NU? U Yes @ No Review Acceptable Not Acceptable Needed Date VT Lead: Nort, Anthony A VT Mgr: schopfer. Don K IRC Chrrui: singh. Ar.and K Date:
O SL Conwnents:
Printed 1o/1497 4 27.58 PM Page 1 of 1
Northeast Utilties ICAVP DR No. DR MP3-0003 Millstone Unit 3 Discrepancy Report
~
Review Group: Programmatic DR RESOLUTION ACCEPTED Reviv Element: Gange Process p g ,
&'u:1pline: Othe' Discrerwey Type: Desgn Control Procedure Om "
System / Process: N/A ~ No NRC Significance level: 4 Date faxed to NU:
Date Published: 7/17/97 Discrepancy: Environmental Screening Desc<lption: We have rev;ewed the following procedures as they relate to licensing documents: Design Control Manual (DCM), revision 05; Procedure NGP 4.03, revision 7 (effective 11/4/96), titled
" Changes and Revisions to Final Safety Analysis Reports";
Procedure NGP 4.04, revision 9 (effective 1/12/97), titled
" Review and Approval of Proposed Changes to Selected License Requirements"; and Procedure NGP 5.14, revision 11 (effective 4/1/96) titled "Non-Radiological Environmental reviews of Plant Design Change Records and Procedure Changes". Based on this review we have noted the following discrepancies.
- 1. Design changes such as new office buildings and warehouses are outside the scope of the DCM (reference Attachment 12 of the DCM). The above procedures do not require that these typ6s of des go changes ci se:,uiliiig changes to the Updated Final safety Analysis Report receive an environmental screening g to ensure that they do not constitute an unreviewed environmentalquestion as required by paragraph 2.C.2 of the Operating License and 10 CFR 51.90.
)
2 Procedure NGP 4.04 is intemally inconsistent. Section 4.3 of NGD 4.04 states that changes to the following documents constitute license amendments: 1) the Environmental Protection Plan (Millstone 3), when effects are significant enough to exceed the effects previously reviewed and accepted by the NRC for the particular system or type of operation involved, or 2) the Millstone 3 Environmental Protection Plan.
Review Valid Invalid Needed Date Initiator: sh6ppard, R. P.
O O O 7/7/97 VT Lead: Rpn, Tnornas J G O O 7/S/S7 VT Mgr: schopfer, Don K G O O 7/10/S7 IRC Chmn: singh, Anand K G O O 7/11/S7 Date:
INVALID:
Date: 9/15/97 RESOLUTION: Disposition:
Item 1 Procedure OA-6, Site Facility Utilization, addresses changes outside the scope of the DCM and ensures that those p changes not covered by the DCM have regulatory requirements identified on the Site Utilization Request form. The Site Utilization Request form must be approved by the Site Utilization Committee (SUCL Pnnted 10/1497 3.54 27 PM Page 1 of 4
e
- - - _ - . . - - . - . - - ~ - - - - - - --- - -
Northeast Utilities ICAVP DR No. DR-MP3-0003 Millstone Unit 3 Discrepancy Report O
V The SUC memben?p consists of the following:
Manager. Site FacFies Chairperson appointed by Manager.
Site Facilities Supervisor Site Facilities Secretary appointed by Manager.
Site Facilities Unit 1 Representative Unit 2 Representative Unit 3 Representative Unit Services Representative Site Facilities Rep. NUSCo Land Planning and Management Rep.
NNECo Nuclear Services NNECo Generation Test Services Rep.
Rep.
NUSCo Nuclear Training Security Representative Rep.
Station Fire Marshall Unit 1 Design Engineering Representative Specifically step 1.7.6 of OA-6 requires the Supervisor-Site Utilization to "Specify regulatory requirements in Review and Approval for Use, Modification, installation, or Construction Section of Attachment 2,' Site Utilization Request,' and recommend appenval er (1iseppmual" s OA-6 is the starting point for changes thought to be outside the scope of the DCM. Changes are either determined to be in the k scope of the DCM or outside that scope. Those changes which are outside the scope of the DCM have all regulatory (including environmental) requirements identified on the Site Utilization Request. The NUSCo Land Planning and Management Representative on the SUC is well aware of environmental regulatory requirements and has served on the SUC to ensure allland use issues are property addressed.
Two enhancements have been made to OA 6. The first added steps to more clearly direct initiation of DCM changes for flood plan effects when any structure is erected.
The second change added an Environmental Services section representative to the Site Utilization Committee. The Environmental Services group was formed onsite at Millstone in February of 1997 and the Manager-Environmental Services has been serving on the SUC since May of 1997 at his request. The procedure change formalized the position and added another level of review in addition to the current NUSCo Land Planning and Management Representative. The procedure change was handled via a change notice and was approved at the 7/23/97 SORC meeting. Another planned enhancement to the procedure is to add a clarification that states that changes to the EPP also effect the OL and that the DCM may be used as a guide for 9 environmental screening criteria for changes. This is being A tracked by AR97018600, it has also been recognized that a greater awareness of anuimnmantal errmaninn
~^
' ranniromante le nandad ihmunh
" ~ ~ "
Pnnted 10/1497 3.54-34 PM ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Page 2 of 4
-. a -- - - . --- - - . - _ .- -- .
Northeast Utilities ICAVP DR No. DR-MP3-0003 Millstone Unit 3 Discrepancy Report V corrective actions associated with CR M3-971480 initiated S/17/97 and ACR M3-96-0454 initiated 7/24/96 a1d assessments performed at the start of the CMP.
- i result AR97011859 and AR96027594 are intended to imr. rove awaieness and performance of environmental screenings through training and a review of how the administrative procedures interface with each other, Item 2 - This part of the DR refers to an apparent inconsistoney within NGP 4.04 Rev. 9. Section 4.3 of the NGP lists those items which would require a License Amendment Request (LAR) to be initiated. Two of the conditions for which an LAR is required are as follows: item 4.3.4 lists, "A change in the EPP that could result in an increase in environmental effects significant enough to exceed the effects previously reviewed and evaluated by NRC for the particular system or type of operation involved" ; item 4.3.7 lists, " Changes to the Millstone 3 Environmental Protection Plan".
Step 4.3.7 could be interpreted as being inclusive of 4.3.4, however in discussions with Licensing, the Intent of 4.3.7 is for direct changes to the Environmental Protection Plan whereas 4.3.4 was intended to address those offects on the EPP which could result indirectly bacause of a plant or operation::t ch::n;;e. ,
p CR M3-97 2186 has been initiated to document and track this g issue. This is a procedure enhancement only to clarify the wording to step 4.3.4.
Conclusion:
ltem 1 The Millstone site depends on a cumbination of the Design Control Manual (for changes within the scope of that manual) and procedure OA 6, Site Facility Utilization, to ensure that the Environmental Protection Plan is adhered to for all power block and site changes.
For changes outside the scope of the DCM, the required environmental reviews for permits and effects on the OL are being performed in accordance with OA-6, Site Facility Utilization. Based on your observations and as a result of increased awareness of environmental screening issues, due to the establishment of the Environmental Services section onsite at Millstone, several enhancements have been made and more are planned to OA-6 to ensure that a high quality and consistent review is completed on each and every occasion. This is being tracked by AR97018600.
Item 2 The DR points out the need to clarify a portion of NGP 4.04, Review and Approval of Proposed Changes to Selected License Requirements. This issue has been documented and will be tracked to completion (,n CR M3-97 2186.
Previously identined by Nu? @ Yes O No Printed 10/14/97 3:54 36 PM Page 3 of 4 P
l
-.7 _.
Northeast Utilities ICAVP DR No. DR MP3-0003 Millstone Unit 3 Discrepancy Report Review initiator: Sheppard, R. P.
VT Lead: Ryan. Thomas J VT Mge: Schopfer, Don K '
IRC Chmn: Srgh, Anand K Date: 9/15/97 st Conants: The response as stated is acceptable. The DR had identified two discrepancies. The first part as it tumed out was previously identified, the second was not. Because the previously identified part of the discrepancy had a significance level of 3 and the unidentified part has a significance level of 4, the final discrepancy level has been changed to a 4.
O V
O Printed 10/14/97 3:54 39 PM Page 4 of 4
__ _ _ ~.
Northeast Utilities ICAVP DR No. DR MP3-0004 Millstone Unit 3 Discrepancy Report Review Group: Programmate DR RESOLUTION ACCEPTED Review Element: Change Proceu Discipline: Maintenance' ' Potential Operabmty issue Discrepancy Type: Design Control rrmdure Om System / Process: N/A 4g
~
NRc Significance level: 3 Date faxed to NU:
Date Published: 8/2&97 Discrepancy: Control ar,d Use of Ventior Technical Manuals
Description:
We have reviewed the applicable portions of procedures DC 6.
Revision 1 (affective 9/11/96) titled " Nuclear Plant Records and Vendor Technical Manuals", NGP 6.13, Revision 3 (effective 1/30/95) titled " Processing Vendor Information", PEG 6.05, Revision 4 (effective 3/11/97) titled " Vendor interface for Key Safety Related Components" and DC 1, Revision 5 (effective 3/3/97) titled " Administration of Procedures and Forms" conceming the use and control of vendor technical ma,1uals.
Based on this review we have noted the following two discrepancies.
- 1. Paragraph 1.18.10 of DC 6 allows an unreviewed manual to be used on a temporary basis. No procedural controls were found for the control of this unreviewed information, such as tracking its use. Secuun S.2.* of the NU Quality Assurance Program states: Tor those cases where design verification cannot be completed prior to release for procurement, y manufacturing, and construction, procedures ensure that design verification is completed prior to the point when the installation is declared operational."
It is recognized that Unresolved item Repon (UIR) 148 recommended that Interim use of data not in the document control system used to support critical activities be permitted only for a limited time and include a documented technical review prior to use it is not evident that DC 6 or another goveming procedure is being revised as a result of UIR 148 to establish the above controls.
- 2. Attachment 7 to DC 6 states that new vendor technical manuals are distributed to Simulator Training. The simulator must be approved or certified per 10 CFR 55.45 which became effective 5/26/87. Regulatory Guide 1.149 and ANS 3.5 provide guidance on methods acceptable to the NRC for this approval or certification. Attachments A to ANS 3.5-1985 and 1993 state that changes to technical manuals are to be included in the simulator design data (Regulatory Position 6 of Guide 1.149 dated 4/87 and Regulatory Position 1.7 of Guide 1.149 dated 4/96 invoke the use of these attachments). Therefore, only sending new vendor technical manuais to Simulator Training does not meet Regulatory Guides 1.149 dated 4/87 or 4/96 and does not maintain the simulator design basis. All updates to the vendor technical manuals thould also be distributed to Simulator (v) Training.
- 3. It is recommended that Plant Engineering attempt to obtain Pnnted 10/1497 3 56 09 PM Page 1 or 3
4 Northeast Utilities ICAVP DR No. DR MP3-0004 Millstone Unit 3 Discrepancy Report
( vendor concurrence for changes to vendor technical manuals which were not initiated by the vendor. 9 ha above procedures do not require this attempt. PEG 6.05 does uluire an annual contact with vendors of key safety related equipment at which time the vendor is questioned about changes the vendor has made to technical manuals and whether the latest revision has been transmitted to NU. See INPO DE 102 titled " Control of Vendor Manuals" for further details (Reference 2.12 in DC 6).
Review vand InveHd Needed Date initiator: shepperd, R. P.
O O O 8/22/97 VT Lead: Ryan, Thomas J G O O ar22/97 VT Mgr: schopfer, Don K O O O e.22/97 IRc Chmn: singh. Anand K g Q Q 8/22/97 Date:
INvALI0:
Date: 10/10/97 RESOLUTION: Disposition:
DC-6 is no longer the procedural basis for control of Vendor Technical Manuals.
Item i O
V The reference to DC-6 as a procedural basis for VTM control is no longer valid. Procedure DC-16, Vendor Equipment Technical Information program (VETIP), superseded DC-6 and provides instructions for controlling vendor technical manuals. This includes control of VTM receipt, distribution and revision.
Procedure DC-16 was effective 6/30/97. Change to DC-16, effective 8/20/97, provided clarification in the use of the VTMs when preparing plant procedures.
Item 2 As stated in Section 1 of DC 16 "All approved vendor technical manuals (VTMs) are issued from, and controlled by, Nuclear Document services. One copy of each VTM will be maintained by Document Control as the master copy Controlled Document Libraries (CDLs) will contain and administer VTMs as specified in NDM-4, Controlled Document Distribution.."
This process requires that all VTM revisions / changes are maintained and distributed to CDLs and approved controlled cooy holders in a controlled manner. This control extends to the Simulator as well.
Item 3 O
b This item recommends that Plant Engineering attempt to obtain vendor concurrence for changes to vendor technical manuals which were not initiated by the vendor.
Printed 10/1497 3.56:18 PM Page 2of 3
Northeast Utilities ICAVP DR No. DR MP3-0004 Millstone Unit 3 Discrepancy Report O DC 16 Section 1.5 recognizes that changes to VTMs occur
~
through mechanisms other than vendor input. This includes, but is not limited to, License Event Reports (LER), Significant Event Reports, Significant Operating Experience Reports (SOER),
VTM use and equipment modifications. Step 1.5.5 requires vendors be contceted if the change was not initiated by the vendor and that the contact be documented.
Conclusion:
The two discrepancies identified in DR-MP3-0004, items 1 and 2, have been previously discovered, and corrected by DC-16, which supersedes DC-6. S&L's recommendation in item 3 is also incorpcrated into the new procedure, as explained in detail above.
Prev 6ously identified by NU? iGJ Yes (.J No Review init6ator: Shepperd, R. P.
c a cc$ Date VT Lead: Ryan, Thomas J O O 15157 VT Mgt: Schopfer. Don K O O 15157 BRC Ctwnn: singh, Anand K O O 1 min 7 Dete:
0 0 0 ice'457 10/10/97 sL Comments:
p G
Pnnted 101497 3:56:23 PM Page 3 of 3 i
l
- s. _- -.
Northeast Utilities ICAVP DR No. DR.MP3-0008 f.
Millstone Unit 3 Discrepancy Report
(]3 Review Group: Programmatic Review Element: Chany Procese DR RESOLUTION ACCEPTED p g Di.cipline: ot'"
Discrepancy Type: Desgn C ttrol Procedsre Ow system / Process: N/A NRC significence level: 3 Date faxed to NU:
Date Published: 7/1o97 D'ecrePency: Procedure Step Sequence Descript6on: We have reviewed Millstone Station Procedure DC 4 Rev. 3 (effective 1/17/97), titled
- Procedural Compliance". Based on this review, we have noted the following discrepancy.
Paragrapn 1.4.1 of procedure DC 4 allows, for continuous or generallevel of use procedures, unless otherwise stated in the procedure, a First Line Supervisor or, in the case of operations procedures, the Shift Manager or Unit Supervisor to autitorize deviation from the specified step sequence, as long as the intent of the procedure is neither changed i,or compromised. This is not consistent with the standard industry approach for continuous use procedures, especially for operations procedures.
Continuous level of use procedures as defined in Attachment i to DC 4 are pivwduies which "... sequhe diep-by >lep use tu prevent immediate effects on nuclear or personnel safety ...".
The continuous use procedure steps should be performed in the sequerice stated in the procedure. See, for example, XVI.C.2.0 of INPO Guideline 85-017. Rev. 2, titled " Guidelines for the Conduct of Operations at Nuclear Power Stations", which states in part: " Training on this sequence, reinforced with procedures that show the same sequence, will serve to improve operator performance by development of pattems of action that are more easily remembered. If a procedure step must be performed out of the sequence specified, a procedure change should be completed prior to performing the step unless the proceduro specifically states that the st6p may be performed in any order."
In addition, paragraph 5.2.3 of INPO Prelimina,y Good Practice OA 106 titled "Techn: cal Procedure Use and Adherence", which is referenced in DC 4, states: "The policy (on procedure t,se and adherence) provides direction for performing some technical procedures in other than the normal step-by step manner and identifies conditions requiring procedure changes. For example, procedures that allow limited portions to be performed or the sequence of steps to be changed will include specific instmetions on the conditions under which this use is appropriate. Otherwise, procedure changes are required to be initiated and approved prior to performance of the limited portions of the procedure or changing the sequence of steps."
Review Valid invalid Needed Date initiator: shepperd, R. P.
L O O O 7/7/97 VT Leed: Ryer ThomesJ Q Q Q 7/7/97 VT Mgr: schopfer. Don K O O O 77/S7 -
Pnnted 1o/1497 4 oo:is PM Page 1 of 3
Northeast Utilities ICAVP DR No, DR-MP3-0008 Millstone Unit 3 Discrepancy Report IRC Chmn: singh. Anand K Q Q Q 7/r/97 oste:
INVAUD: i Dete: 9/2/97 RESOLUTION: Disposition' This is in response to DR MP3-0008. The issue specific to Millstone Procedure DC 4, Rev 3, Step 1.4.1, which allowed for deviation for the specified step sequence in continuous level procedures, was identified in Millstone Station Self Assessment 2 CPG SA 97 01 in April 1997.
The primary objective of the assessment was to determine if Millstone Unit 2 had a population of procedures which met the requirements of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Regulatory Guide 1.33, Quality Assurance Program Requirements (Operation), Rev. 2, February 1978. The secondary objective of the assessment was to develop a qualitative overview assessment of technical adequacy and usability of Millstone Unit 2 procedures.
Solf. Assessment 2CPC CA 97-01 resuits epocific to Mitiolone Procedure DC-4, Rev.3, concluded that DC 4 procedural compliance did not meet inAstry standards as expressed in O INPO OA 106, Technical Procedure Use and Adherence, and INPO OP204, Conduct of Operations. Condition Report CR M2-97 0881 was wruten on 5/16/97 to address assessment concems. Conditloa Report activities are tracked under A/R No.
97011945, Assignment No. 01.
Millstone Procedure DC-4, Rev 3 is presently being revised to address Self Assessment 2 CPG SA 97 01 concems. Revision 4 of procedure DC-4 was started in June 1997, and a significant number of enhancements were incorporated including the re-write of step 1.4.1 to ensure that Continuous or General Use procedure steps are performeo in the sequence stated in the procedure (Ref, attached draft copy of DC 4, Rev 4, Page 5). At this time DC-4, Rev,4, is in the verification and validation process, and is stated for final approval in August 1997.
Conclusion:
DR MP3-0008 issue specific to Millstone Procedure DC 4, Rev.
- 3. Step 1.4.1 was previously identified by Millstone Station during Self-Assessment 2 CPG SA 97 01. Procedure DC 4 (Rev.
3), Step 1.4.1, is balng revised in Rev,4 of DC-4 to ensure that Continuous or General Use procedure steps are performed in the sequen:.e stated in the procedure. Coirective action is tracked under Condition Report CR M2 97 0811 initiated on 5/16/97, with a due date of 8/19/97.
Previously idenU%d by NU7 @ Yes (.) No
- Printed 1o/'.497 400.23 PM Page 2 oft
Northeast Utilities ICAVP DR No. DR-MP3 0008 Millstone Unit 3 Discrepancy Report O~ inniatori sheppard, R. P.
R.--
VT Lead: Ryan, Thernes J VT Mgrt Schopfer. Don K IRC Chmn: Singh, Anand K Date: 7/31/97 SL Comments:
O O
Printed 10/1497 4 00:27 PM -
Page 3 of 3
4 - , . - - - - - - - - . - - - - - - - - - - - ~ ~ ' ~ - --- ~ ~ - - - - ~ - - - - -
Northeast Utilities ICAVP DR No. DR MP3 0018 MiitstDne Unit 3 Discrepancy Report asumet .
( Rev6ew Group: Operstone & Maintenance and Testng DR RESCtUTK)N ACCEPTED Review Elerv d: Test Procedure Disc 4hr.d. Opersuons Potential Operability lasue Discrepancy Typv 0 & M & T Prt todure Yes Systern' Process: R$s i NO NRC Significance level: 4 Date faxed to NU:
Date Published: 8/22/97 Diec,*pency: MISIDENTIFIED PUMP DESIGNATOR IN STEP OF PROCEDURE
Description:
CONTAINMENT REClRCULATION PUMP 3RSS*P1 A OPERATIONAL READINESS TEST SP 3606.1 REV 10, CH.1 STEP 4.4.12.1, LAST BULLET STATES: 'CLOSE and LOCK 3RSS*V958, containment recirculation pump C discharge header vent".
The Step should be corrected to read ' containment recirculation pump A discharge header vent'.
Review Val 6d invol6d Needed Dele initiator: Ungeren. R VT Lead: Bass, Ken O O O 8" S7 G O O a/i/97 VT Mgr: Schopfer. Don K Q Q Q &597 IRC Chrtm: singh, Anand K Q Q Q 8/12,97 Date:
INVALID:
Date: 9/10/97 RESOLUTION: DISPOSITION:
Each pump has its own test procedure. Since SP 3606.1 deals with pump *A' and since the valve number is correct, an operational error is unlikely. This is considered a typographical error, which will be scheduled for correction with the nest procedure revision. Condition Report M3-97 2822 was written to track correction of this error to completion.
CONCLUSION:
Discrepancy report DR MP3-00018 Identifies a discrepant condition not previously discovered by NU which requires correction. SP 3606.1, step 4,4.12.1 incorrectly describes 3RSS*V958 as " recirculation pump C," where it should read
" recirculation pump A." Condition Report M3-97 2822 has been
( Qenerated to provide the corrective actions required to resolve this discrepant condition.
Previously identifkd by NU7 C) Yes E9) No Rev6ew initiator: Ungeran, R. Acceptable Not Acceptable Needed Date (f VT Lead: Bass. Ken 8 O O S/1oS7 VT Mgr: Schopfer. Don K O O S/17/97 Printed 10/1497 4 01:11 k " "" 5 A#
f2 1
0
Northeast Utilities ICAVP DR No. DR-MP3-0018 Millstone Unit 3 Discrepancy Report O . v . . . ... v.mr. -w. ,
om.:
O O O 555sS7 SL Comments:
c i
O Pnnled 1W1497 4 01:19 PM PS2d 2 l
Northeast Utilities ICAVP DR No. DR MP3 0036 Millstone Unit 3 Discrepancy Report Review Group: System DR RESOLUTION ACCEPTED Review Element: System Design Discipline: Pip 6ng Design PotentialOpersh46id tuo Discrepancy Type: Ucenseg Document O va Systern' Process: N/A ? No NRC Signincance level: 4 Date Faxed to NU:
Date Published: &OS97 D6ecrepen.y: Mathematical representation inconsistancy D.acripoon: In the process of reviewing Section 3.78.3.6.2 of the FSAR, we noted the following discrepancies:
(1) On page 3.7 26 of the FSAR lt is stated that,"when considering a particular vibration mode, responses in a particular direction due to the two horizontal ditoction excitations are combined first by the SRSS method and then combined with response (in the same direction) due to the vertical direction excitation by absolute sum method".
On the same page it is further stated that, "In mathematical terms, the modified SRSS method of response combination due to three spatial components of an earthquake at a particular node point can be stated as Equation 3.78.310" Equation 3.78.310 has a typographical error. The response due to the vertical component of the seimic excitatlore should not be
(
within the square root sign.
(2) On page 3.7 27 of the FSAR, the two variables Rk and R are defined. The two definitions are interchanged.
Review Val 6d invalid Needed Date Initialor: Prakash, A.
O O O S22S7 VT Lead: Neri, Anthony A O O O S2SS7 VT Mgr: Schopfer Don K O O O STSS7 IRC Chmn: singh, Anand K Q Q Q &?&97 Date:
INVALID:
Date: 9/22/97 RESOLUTION: Response ID.M3-IRF 00288 Disposition:
These items have been previously identified and documented in change request FSAR CR 97 MP3-413, which was initiated on 4/17/97. The FSAR CR process will track this change request to completion.
Conclusion:
A The two errors stated in DR-MP3-0036 have been previously Q identified, and have been documented in FSAR CR 97@P3-413.
PreHously identined by NU? (9) Yee C) No ~
Printed 10/1497 4 03 32 PM Page 1 Sf 2 l
l
(
Northeast Utilities ICAVP DR No. DR MP3-0036 Millstone Unit 3 Discrepancy Report O
V initiator: Prakash, A.
Rev6ew Acceptable Not Acceptable Needed Date
\T Lead: Nort, Anthony A O SSS7 (T Mgt: Schopfer, Don K O O a22s7 4 IRC Chmn: Singh, Anand K g g ggggg7 g g g ggg397 Date: 9/22/97 sL corwnents: FSAR Change Request (FSARCR) 47 MP3-413 was initiated on 4/17/97, but was not approved by the Originator's Manager until 8/15/97, and therefore was not available for S&L verification NU Response shown on ICAVP Response Form, Response ID:M3-IRF 00328 is acceptable.
Pnnted 10/1497 4 o3 40 PM Page 2 of 2 i
?
, a-- . -
Northeast Utilities ICAVP DR No. DR MP3 004? 3 Millstone Unit 3 Discrepancy Report s
Rev6ew Group: Programmate DR RESOLUTION ACCEPTED Review Element: correewe Ac'on Proctre Disc 6p8ae: Operet.ons "
- I '
Discrepancy 1ype: corrective Acton System' Process: sWP $ No NRC 14gnificance level: 4 Date faxed to NU:
Date Publistwd: E'31/97 Discrepency: Incomplete Corrective Action for ACR M3 96-0360 Deecripuon: Dunng lovioW of ACR M3 96-0360 it was noted that corrective actions did not address potentialimpact to operating procedures and other plant controlled documents.
' The subject ACR describes a concem with insufficient detal!In the FSAR to OMenbe the Chilled Water system (3314F). The inillator describes that "in the event both chillers are disabled, the crosstles could be utilized to provide emergency cooling",
further stating that the Service Water system (3326) "is ac'ually cross tied in in 3 locations."
The corrective actions consist only of determining if an
' expanded description in the FSAR is warranted and initiation of an FSARCR if needed. No consideration was given to potential Imp.ict to station operadog powduin fut utilization of the emergency service water crosstles. Procedures and other potentially impacted documents should be reviewed for adeauacy as part of the corrective action process or if such review was already conducted and with no resultant impact , this should be documented somewhere in the ACR.
Note: It is recognized that the FSARCR process includes consloeration of affected procedures and other documents, however, reliance should not be placed on a single process to ensure configuraflon control, Moreover, in this particular case, the FSARCR is only indicated in the corrective action as "if needed" Accordingly,its generation along with consideration of potential impacts to other plant controlled documents to address the Initiator's
- lack of detall" concem is not assured. For example, the actual evaluation of this concem when considered in light of all potentially affected documents might even result in the determination that additional FSAR detall is not warranted with direction instead to revise operator training lesson plans and procedures. This result would not be achieved under the present planned corrective action which oniy considers whether or not a change is required to the FSAR.
i Review Val 6d invalid Needed Date initiator: Navarro, Mark g Q O 83s7 VT Lead: Ryan, Thomas J D 0 O e/22.S7 VT Mgr: Cchopfer, Don K IRC Chmn: singh, Anand K O O O ar22s7 1
O O O e/2as7 Date:
INVALlo:
Prtn'ed t 10/159711:21:03 AM Page 1 of 2 I
i l
Northeast Utilities ICAVP DR No. DR MP3-0043 Mmstone Unit 3 Discrepancy Report oste: 10/4/97 RESOLUTION: Disposition:
The ACR was wntten to document a lack of detali ., the FSAR for the Chilled Water system associated with the Service Water cross lie at the inlet of the Control Building Chillers The basis for the /,CR was to add Information about the cross tie to be consisient with the information provided in the Service Water section of the FSAR. During disposition of the ACR, design engineering decided not to add the information to the FSAR because the use of the cross tie is outside the design basis of the plant. The ACR initiator concurred.The corrective actions of the subject ACR did not include consideration for affected procedures because operating procedures already pristed to address the use of the cross ties. Refer to OP 3314F, Control Building Heating, Ventilation, Air Conditioning, And Chill Water, section 7.11 : nd EOP 3503, Shutdown outside Control Room, Step 29 for specific procedural guidance on establishing and restoring the cross tie.
Conclusion:
DR MP3-0043 does not identify a discrepant condition Based on the exist 6tk e of the operating procedures, the corrective
~
adlons of the ACR are sufficient.
O Previously identined by Nu? O Yes t#1 No Non Descrepent CondN6on 9 71 Yes Q No P.ev6ew gg y,, y,, Acceptable Not Acceptable Needed Date VT Leed: Ryan, Thomes J VT Mgri Schopfer, Don K 1RC Cnmn: Singh, Anand K Date: 10/4/97 sL Comments:
(
O Printed 10/15/9711:21;14 A M Page 2 of 2' l
l
4 Northeast Utilities ICAVP DR No. DR MP3 0046 Millstone Unit 3 Discrepancy Report Rev6ew Group: Systeen DR RESOLUTION ACCEPTED Rev6ew flwnent: System Des 6gn Potential 0perabthty issue Discipline: $tructural Desige
'::.screpancy type: calculation O ve. ,
SystertvProcess: $WP N'
NRC Signif6cance level: 4 Date N to NU-Date Published: 6397 D6*croPancy: Pipe support calculation discrepancy Deecrtpuon: We have reviewed pipe support calculation no.12179 NP(F)-
Z19C-007, Rev. 4. Based on this review we have noted the following discrepancies.
- 1. The values of Fy & Fz are switched on page 11 of the calculation. The vilues of Fy & Fz should be 1600# & 2$0#
respectively. Also value of My should be 3500 in-# instead of 2800 in-#,
- 2. Due to above discrepancies, the values of F1, F2, F3 and M1 will change to 1600#,471# ,415# and 3500 in-# respectively, on page-12.
Rev6ew Vaud invaHd Needed Date
!..;t etor, Pat &l, A.
O O O 6357 VT Lead: Nort, Anthony A O O O 6*S7 VT Mgr: Schopfer, Don K O O O 6%S7
\ IRC Chmn: Singh. Anand K O O O 6%S7 Date:
INVALID:
Date: 9/23/97 RESOLUTION: NU has concluded that Discrepancy Report, DR-MP3-0046, has identified a condition not previously discovered by NU which requires cortection. The calculation will be revised to correct this error The impect of this error was evaluated and determined to have no affect on the final design of the pipe support. CR M3 97-3122 has been initiated to provide the necessary corrective actions to resolve this issue.
Prev 6ously identifled by NU7 O Yes #1 No Review initiator: Patel. A.
- ** ' "'E ' '
VT Lead: l' ort, Anthony A VT Mgr: Schopfer. Don K tRC Chmn: Singh, Anand K Date: g/23/g7 SL Conments:
O V
T Pnnted 10/1497 4 o6 34 PM Page 1 of i
4 Northeast Utilities ICAVP DR No. DR MP3 0060 Millstone Unit 3 Discrepaticy Report Review Group: Programmetc DR REsDLUTION ACCEPTED Rev6ew Element: Correcttve Aeto. Procne D'26pl6ne Mechancel f4p Potential Operability issue Diocrepency Type: corrective Actm. O vn systerivProcese: sWP 9g NRC C;gnifnconce level: 4 Date faxed to NV:
Date Publ6ehed! 6397 Discrepency: Use of an Unapproved Code Case DeectiPtion: 1. Condition Report (CR) M3 97 0901 deals with a missed successive nondestructive examination. Corrective Action #4 of the approved Corrective Action Plan requires that a support inspection procedure be developed using Code Case N 491 1.
The NRC has only tentatively endorsed this revision of the Case.
and tne Unit 3 ISI Program commits to revision 0 of the Case, This is primanly a licensing issue, rather than a design issue, because the technical differences between the Case revisions are minimal as they apply to this application.
- 2. In addition to this discrepancy,information and signatures are missing on the first three pages of the CR package. The pages are titled
- Corrective Action Review of Completed Assignments Pilor to RP4 idv. 4 esca, oate.-
Review V664d invalid Needed Date
( initiator: Sheppard, R. P.
VT 4.ead: Ryan, Thomas J O O O sus 7 VT Mgt: Schopfer, Don K O O O ar22s7 O O O a/22/97 IRC Chmn: Singh, Anand K O O O eraser Date:
INVALID:
3 DMe: 10/1/97 RESOLUTION: Disposillon:
NU has concluded that Discrepancy Report, DR MP3-0060, has identified a condition not previously discovered by NU that requires correction, item #1: A CR change (Form RP4 2) has been initiated per RP 4 to change corrective action #4 of CR M3 97 0901 to correct this condition. Code Case N 491 1 was not intended to be used, this was an isolated error by an ISI Engineer familiar with the new Code Case, however NU has not performed any work to this Cods Case. The new corrective action changes SP 31129
Inservice inspection" to be more specific on the actions required for eve'uating inspection results (See Attached Change 1 to Section 4.4 of SP 31129).
( ltem #2: These sheets were being used informally by the Corrective Actions Department to ensure that the actual corrective action was reviewed against the approved corrective
, m
.ed 10/1497 4 06.09 PM action in ensure comnlete Imnlementation orior to closino out the __
Page 1 of 2 i
J - . -- . - . - - - -- - -
Northeast Utilities ICAVP DR No. DR MP3 0060 Millstone Unit 3 Discrepancy Report CR. The three ' Corrective Action Review of Completed Assignments Prior to RP4 rev 4 effectivo date" pages have been removed from the package as RP 's I's r. 4 was issued prior to the respective corrective actions l'elng completed, in these cases the Corrective Actions Department only uses the form as a reminder to verify RP4 4 (CR Action Closeout) is in .
the package. CR M3 97 2849 was written to provide the necessary corrective actions to resolve this issue.
Conclusion:
NU has conclud3d that Discrepancy Report, DR MP3 0060, has identified a condition not previously discovered by NU that requires correction, item #4 of the Corrective Action Plan will be corrected to remcyc the refersace to Osas C444 4Wl. The 3 pages have been removed from the package as they are not required since RP 4 Rev 4 has been issued effective 2/25/97.
CR M3-97 2849 was written to provide the necessary corrective actions to resolve this issue.
Previously identined by Nu? (,) Yes 98 No Review initiatort shoppard, R. P.
VT Lead: nyan, T emas J b b b VT Mgra schopfer. Don K IRC Chmn: singh, Anarws K oste: g/30/97 sL comments: The response to this DR is acceptable. As stated in the DR the use of the wrong revislor, of the Code Case for resolution of the NCR is a licensing issue vs. a design issue. The difference between Revision 0 and Revision 1 of this Case involves snubber inspection. However, snubber inspection is not included in the Unit 3 ISI Program Manual (reference section 5.4.5 of this manual) since it is conducted in accordance with the augmented surveillance requirements of the plant Technical specifications.
Therefore, the use of Revision 1 of the Case would involve no technical differences from the NRC approved Revision O.
This discussion is relevant to an additional use of Revision 1 of the Case which was noted during the review of this response.
Section 1.1.1 of the ISI Program Manual commits to Revision 0 of the Case whereas section 5.4 of this manual states that component supports are examined in accordance v.ith the requirements of Revision 1. Paragraph IWA 1400(c) of ASME Section XI requires that revisions to this manual, including this latest change (Change 4 effective May 12,1996) be sent to the NRC. Therefore, since this intemal contradiction in the manual has no technical effect and the manual change will be subject to review by the NRC, this is noted here for NU's information only.
Pruited 10/1497 4 08-18 PM page 2 of 2 i
Northeast Utilities ICAVP DR No. DR MP3-0055 Millstone Unit 3 Discrepancy Report Review Group: Programmetc DR RESOLUTION ACCEPTED Review Element: Corrective Acton Process p , , ,
Discipline: Mechanical Design Disesepancy Type: Corrective Acton Om System / Process: sWP NRC Significance level: 4 Date faxed to NU:
Date Published: &"2E97 Discrepancy: Incomplete Adverse Condition Report
Description:
Adverse Condition Report (ACR) M3 96 0087 deals with a pipe strap that does not agree with the construction drawing.
Originally the Duty Officer decided that the ACR would not be closed following initial review. Later this decision was changed, but the basis for closure information (block 2A of Form RP 4-4)
' tin n;; f;;;;d ad;.
Review Valid invalid Needed Date initiator: Shepperd, R. P.
O O Q 8/22/97 VT Lead: Ryan. Thomas J G O O er22s7 VT Mgr: Schopfer, Don K O O O a22S7 IRC Chmn: Singh. Anand K O O O a/2ss7 Date:
1 INVALID.
Date: 9/12/97 s RESOLUTION: Disposition:
Note 2 on drawing 12179 BZ 19E-45 refers to general notes on drawing 12179-BZ-19E 3. Drawing 12179-BZ 19E 3 sheet 2
, Note 30 allows the use of this attemate U-Strap. This is the basis for closure of ACR M3-96 0087. Section 2A has been updated in the original ACR to reflect this information.
Conclusion:
Discrepancy report DR MP3-00055 identifies a discrepant condition not previously discovered by NU which requires correction. Section 2A has been filled out with the basis for closure information as a result of this DR. Condition Report M3-97 2910 was generated to 6Jdress and document this condition.
Preparer:0CDate:OC
! CN. MaddenO 1
l Independent Reviewer:OCDate:OD l CR. Enoch0 Unit Lead Review:OCDate:00 OT.F. McCarthy0 Technical Review Team Concurrence:0CDate:00
(- OG. Pitman 0 NU ICAVP Proled Mannaer Annroval:nnDate nn Printed lo/14s7 4.10.13 PM Page 1 of 2
Northeast Utilities ICAVP DR No. DR-MP3-0065 Millstone Unit 3 Discrepancy Report s DJ.G. Fougereo l
Page 1 of 1 Preytwsly identined by NU? (.) Ye6 7F No Review initiator Shopperd. R. P. Acceptable Not Acceptable Needed Date VT Lead: Ryan, Thomas J W12S7 VT Mgr: Schopfer, Don K O $17S7 IRC Chmn: Singh, Anand K O O O 1*'oS7 G O O io15S7 1
Date:
SL Comments:
i e
i l
i i
f 4
I i
i i
l.
I l
. i 1
I i
l l l
I i
4 l
1 Pnnted 1W1497 410.22 PM Page 2 of 2 1
Northeast Utilities ICAVP DR No. DR MP3-0080 Miiistone unit 3 Discrepancy Report Review Group: System DR RESOLUTION ACCEPTED Rev6ew Element: System Design Discipline: Piping Desgn Potential operab6iny issue Discrepancy Type: Calculaton O ve.
SystenVProcess: RSS ,F No NRC Significance level: 4 Date faxed to NU:
Date Published: 6/2297 Discrepancy: Incorrect loads used to evaluate Containment Penetration 110
Description:
In l'e process of reviewing the following calculations for the Recirculation Spray System, (i) Calculation No.12179 NS(B) X7905 Rev.1, dated 9/3/96 (11) Calculation No.12179-NS(B) 120 Rev. 2, CCN #9, dated 12'?O!99 we noted the folicwing discrepancy:
Background:
In the rWpe stress analysis calculation (i), Containment Penetration 110 is shown on the piping Isometric and is modelled in the NUPIPE pipir>g analysis as nodo point 275. An in-line anchor PSA085 is shown on the isometric and is modelled as node point 240.
For the structural evaluation of Containment Penetration 110, piping loads from node point 240, which correspond to the anchor PSA085, were transmitted to and used by the Structural Engineering group to perform the evaluation of Containment Penetration 110 (ii),
Discrepancy:
Incorrect loads are used to perform the structural evaluation of Containment Penetration 110, Rev6ew Valid inval6d Needed Date initiator: Jain, R. C.
VT Lead: Neri, Anthony A O O Q 8/2097 VTA4gr: schopfer, Don K O O O se:os7 Q Q Q B/22/97 IRC Chmn: singh, Anand K Q Q Q 8/26S7 Date:
INVALID:
Date: g/23/97 RESOLUTION: Response ID: M3 IRF-00307 Disposition:
NU has concluded that Discrepancy Report, DR MP3-0080, has identified a condition not oreviousiv disenvered by NU whlch Printed 1o/1497 411:20 PM ' ~
Page 1 of 2
._ x _ _ _ _ _ _ . - - ---- - - - - - - - - - -
Northeast Utilities ICAVP DR No. DR MP3 0080 Millstone Unit 3 Discrepancy Report
( requires correction. CR M3 97 2945 has been initiated to address this condition. There is no impact to the penetration calculation conclusions as there exists significant rnargin in the design. The calculation will b9 revised to correct this error.
Conclusion:
NU has concluded that Discrepancy Report, DR MP3-0080, has identified a condition not previously discovered by NU which requires correction. CR M3 97 2945 was initiated to provide the necessary corrective actions to resolve this issue. The calculation will be revised to correct this error. No work is required in the field.
Prev 6ously identined by NU? O Yes #l No Review initiator: Jann. R. C.
- ^****
- VT Lead: Neri, Anthony A VT Mgt: Schopfer. Don K O O -7 IRC Chmn: Singh, Anand K Dete: 9/23/97 6L Comments:
O Prnnted 10/1497 411:28 PM Pege 2 of 2 I
i
Northeast Utilities ICAVP DR No. DR MP3 0086 Millstone Unit 3 Discrepancy Report Review Oroup: Operations & Maintenance and Testing DR RESOLUTION ACCEPTED Review Eterner.e Test Procedure D4ciphe' Operations " * ""
Discrepancy Type: c & M & T Procedure SysterrVProcess: OSS g NRC signincance level: 4 Date faxed to NU:
Date Putsened: 41497 Diecrepancy: Documentation of " TSP Storage Basket Volume Check" cannot be verified.
Description:
Procedure SP 3606.10, Rev. O, " Trisodium Phosphate Storage Basket Volume Check" (Refueling Interval Surveillance) , refers to OPS Form 3606.101, " TSP Storage Basket Volume Check",
in the following sections:
i) Table of Contents ll) Prerequiste Section 2.1.1 lii) Instructions Sections 4.1,4.1.3 and 4.5, and lv) Review and Signoff Section 5.1.
This requirement on the TSP will ensure that the water in the recircuation sump has a final pH of equal to or greater than 7.0, while not exceeding a spray pH of 10.5.
A review of tlie Millstone Unit 3 Precedure Index and the rmp.r'?ted detsbcsec indiccted thct thic fctm docs not cxist.
O Periodic verification of TSP volume is not documented.
Valkl inval6d Review Needed Date initiator: Ungeran. R.
O O O $5S7 VT Lead: Bass, Ken VT Mgr: Schopfer. Don K
@ Q Q &%97 O O O SSS7 IRC Chmn: Snngh, Anand K Q O O SSS7 Date:
INVALID:
Date: 9/22/97 RESOLUTION' Disposition:
NU has concluded that the issue reported in Discrepancy Report, DR MP3-0085, does not represent a discrepant condition.
Please refer to the attached copy of OPS form 3606.101, TSP Storage Basket Volume Check, effective 5/26/95, for validation that the form exists. The form is listed in OSCAR (Office Services Computerized Administrative Records), NU's procedure tracking database, and is listed in the 3600 series Forms Index
- (effective 5/20/97 page attached). Periodic review of TSP level is documented as noted in the attached completed copy of OPS form 3606.101, NOTE
- The last dated revision of the index has been superseded by an "INFORMATION ONLY"Index that only lists n the form number and the title (page attacned), OSCAR is now Q the controlled method forindexing and verifying current procedure / form revision numbers.
Printed 10/159711:22.oe AM Page 1 of 2
t Northeast Utilities ICAVP DR No. DR44P3-0086 M"Istone Unit 3 Discrepancy Report Sign,ficance Level criteria do not apply here as this is not a discrepant condition.
Conclusion:
NU has concluded that the issue reporte11n Discrepancy Report, DR MP3 0085, does not represent a discrepant condition.
Operations form 3606.101, effective 5/26/95, is listed and controlled in OSCAR. It is also listed on the 3600 series Forms Index and has been used previously to document the Tech Spec requirernent. Significance Level criteria do not apply here as this is not a discrepant condition, Prev 2usly identifled by NU7 U Yes # > No Non Discrepent Condition () Yes Q No Review initiator: Ungeren, R. Acceptable Not Acceptable Needed Date VTLead: Base. Ken O O O S"S7 VT Mgt: Schopfer, Don K O O O or2497 IRC Chmn: Singh, Anand K O O O 10/10'S7 g g O 10/1397 Date: 9/22/97 SL Comnents:
O Prtnted 10/159711:22:17 AM Page 2 of 2 1
O _.._,_m . _ _ - _ _ _ . _. . . _ - < -
--+-----a*
Northeast Utilities ICAVP DR No. DR MP3 0096 Millstone Unit 3 Discrepancy Report Os Review Group: System Reykw Element: System Design DR RESOLUTION ACCEPTED p g Disdpline: Structural Design Discreparry Type: Calculaton O Ya System'Pror,ess: RSS Om NRc Significance level: 4 Date faxed to NU:
Date Published: 9/11/97 Discrepancy: Structural Steel Calculation Discrepancy Desertpoon: We have reviewed Pipe Support cciculation no.12179 SEO BZ-798.4 REV.1. Based en this review we have noted the following discrepancy,
- 1. Page 9 of the calchi ation has mathematical errors, it will not have any impact on rewit.
I = 9.27 In4, should be.11.78 in4 S = 2.42 in3, should be 3.07 in3 Tcap = 52.3 in-k, should he 66.31 in k Rev6ew Valid inval6d Needed Date initletor: Patel, A.
O O O SS7 VT Lead: Nort, Anthony A Q Q Q 9/497 VT Mgr: Schopfer, Don K inC t,nmn: dingn, Anano K
[ Q Q 9/&S7 3 0 0 SSS7 Date:
Q INVALID:
Date: 9/22/97 RESOLUilON: NU has concluded that Discrepancy Report DR MP3 0095 has identified a condition not previously discovered by NU which regelres correction. The calculation will be revised to correct this error. Condition Report (CR) M3-97 3067 was written to provide the necessary corrective actions to resolve this issue.
Previously identified by NU7 O Yes @ No Review Initiator: Patel, A, ** **
VT Lead: Neri, Anthony A VT Mgr: Schopfer, Don K IRC Chmn: Singh, Anand K Date:
SL Comments:
(
t Pnnted 10/1497 413 27 PM Page 1 of 1 l
_ .a _ _._ _
Northeast Utilities ICAVP DR No. DR-MP3 0100 Millstone Unit 3 Discrepancy Report Rev6ew Group: Operatens & Maintenance and Test ng DR RESOLUTION ACCEPTED Revit. ".lement: Operating Procedure g3 g Potential Opetabliny issue Discterer :, Type: 0 & M & T Procedure Systern/ Process: SWP ~
ltRC signmcance level: 4 Date Faxed to NU:
Date Published: g/11/97 D6screpancy: Surveillance SP 3626.13, S.W. Fouling is not consistent with response to Generic Letter 8913.
Descr6 phon:
NU response to Generic Letter 8913 committed to implement a program which will detect and control flow blockage problems due to biofouling. As part of the implementation of the GL 89-13 program, surveillance procedure SP 3626.13, Service Water Heat Exchangers Fouling Determination, was revised to collect data and provide the Operations Department with initial criteria for determination of degraded and inoperable heat exchangers in the Service Water System. Three discrepancies were noted with Rev.15 Change 1 of SP 3626.13 and the associated Forms.
- 1. Not all service water heat exchanges are flushed as part of the fouling determination. This surveillance procedure requires flushing of only the 3HVQ* ACUS 1A&B,3HVQ' ACUS 2A & B, aiki 3EG3*Ei&2 A & B heat exchangers. The stated purpose of p the blowdown is to remove any minor mussel growth, d tbris, and to establish Hypochlortte residual. Removing minor mussel
(' growth, debris, and establishing Hypochlorite residual is important for service water heat exchangers which have low service water flow or have stagnant water due to being isolted or in standby.
- 2. Adequate acceptance criteria is not provided. Steps 4.2.4, 4.8.1.d and 4.8.2.d of surveillance procedure SP 3626.13 Identify, respectively the flushing of the heat exchangers identlfled in item 1 above, but do not give acceptance criteria, adequate guidance to the operator describing what he should be looking for, or adequate time and flow rate to accomplish the required flushing.
- 3. The associated OPS Forms only require signoff verifying the position of drain valve and does not require the operator to !
record the results of the flushing and what if anything was {
flushed from the heat exchanger.
Rev6ew Valid invalid Needed Date inRiator; spear. R. ;
VT Lead: Bass, Ken O O O 8'2SS7 g Q Q B/2697 l
VT Mgr: schoprer. Don K {
Q Q Q &'2&S7 IRC Chmn: singh. Anand K Q )
Q Q E97 D.i.:
INVALID:
emus Date: 10/8/97 RESOLUTION: Disposition:
NU has concluded that the issue reported in Discrepancy Report, l DR MP3-0100. does not represent a discrepant condition.1.
Pnnted 10/159711:24.41 AM :
Page 1 of 2 i
I
Northe:st Utilities ICAVP DR No, DR-MP3 0100 Millstone Unit 3 Discrepancy Report The on-line CCI, CCE, CCP, CCS, HVK and HVR heat exchangers are not b'owndcwn during 10 performance of SP 3626.13 because t's Yve continuous i,0W through them when they are in service. VA.n eny of these heat exchangers is taken out of service, it is placed in fresh water lay up per OP 3326 and SP 3626.12. The HVQ and EDG heat exchangers have the potential during normal plant operations to see either a static
' low conditioq or a continuous, but low, service water flow and have experienced past problems with fouled drains. The units are blowndown during the performance of SP 3626.12 to prevent clogging in the drains as a mtintenance aid and not to provide any indication of tube fouling.2. Acceptance criteria for SP 3626.13 is satisfied by meeting the required flow and delta P or delta T as specified in the surveillance; acceptance criteria is not required for the blowdown. The purpose of the blowdown is to ensure that the drain is free of any debris and to establish a hypochionte residualin the drain line. Failure of the drain to pass water would not make the heat exchanger inoperable. The dra:n line is used when the system is taken out of service.3. Visual inspection of the heat exchangers is per EN 31084 (refer to M3-IRF-00301) to identify and document biofouling and take corrective actions,if required. EN 31084 requires a monthly visualinspection of the EDG and HVQ units. Therefore, weekly documentation of blowde-n retelt! by the operatoris not required. Significance Level criteria do at t apply here as this is not a discrepant condition V
Conclusion:
NU has concluded that the issue reported in Discrepancy Report, DR-MP3-0100, does not represent a discrepant condition. The heat exchangers that are not blowndown do not have the potential for stagnant service water. EN 31084 govems the inspection of heat exchangers and associated drains. Using EN 31084, the System Engineer documents heat exchanger condition with respect to fouling and directs corrective actions when evidence of fouling is found to exist. Significance Level criteria do not apply here as this is not a discrepant condition.
Previously klentifled by Nu? O Yes i No Non Discrepant Condit6on Ifi Yes O No Review fnitiator: Speer, R. ** * **
(
SL Comments:
Printed 10/15,9711:24.50 A*d Page 2 or 2 l i
. i
. l i
l Northeast Utilities ICAVP DR No. DR MP3-0141 Millstone Unit 3 Discrepancy Report !
Rev6ew Group: Prograrnrnate '
DR RESOLUTK)N ACCEPTED Review Element: Mairdenance Procedure p
Discipline: Maintenance Discrepancy Type: 0 & M & T Procedure SysterWProcess: N!A 4g~
NRC fiignificance level: 4 Date faxed to NU: 1 Date Published: 672,97 Discrepancy: Assignment of Tech Spec Required Equipment Surveillance as l
"Non Tech Spec *
Description:
Maintenance Procedure MP 3789AA is designated as *Non Tech Spec" !
l 1 1 ACR 04195 was generated to address the question of whether a surveillance was required for auxillary building heaters. This ACR was subsequently closed on the basis that Maintenance i
Procedure MP 3789AA already existed to test the subj6ct heaters. '
i The TRM (Technical Requirements Manual) specifies i requirements for entering LCOs if the subject heaters are i
Inoperable and outside temperatures are less than or equal to 17 '
degrees F. Refer to OPS Form 3273 3/4.3.1.2.2 and 3/4.3.1.2.4; 3!4.3.5.2 cnd 3/4.3.5.3.
q Documentation provided with the ACR included a June 18,1993 Memorandum that provided a surveillance procedure number (SP 3614.A4) for the new tech spec surveillance which would be generated to test the heaters, further stating that ' Engineering must determine the need for the surveillance.' and
- I believe there should be one since we check heaters on the Aux. Bldg.
s filters.' This new surveillance was apparently never implemented.
The ACR 04195 close out is discrepant because it does not fully address the issues raised in the ACR. Specifically,
- 1. Procedure MP 3789AA does not require the Shift Supervisor to review the test results for system operability determination. In absence of the shift supervisor operability determination, it is not clear how the TRM requirements to e' *er Tech Spec LCOs when
- the heaters fall the test is being ensured.
2.1t is not c!ect what ths justification is for not making the surveillance a Tech Spec surveillance with the attendent administrative controls for ensuring safety related equipment operability. Note that although the TRM requires ent6 ring a Tech Spec LCO if the heaters are INOP when temperatures are below i
17 degrees F, ther. is no reference to Tech Specs in MP 3789AA.
Review Valid invalid Needed Date initiator: Navarro, Mark (f VTt.ead: Ryan Thornas J O O O S'15S7 O O O S'iSS7 VT Mgr: Schopfer, Don K Q O O S'1SS7 Pnnted 10/159711:25 36 AM Page 1 of 3
Northeast Utilities ICAVP DR No, DR.MP3 0141 Millstone Unit 3 Discrepancy Report IRc Chmnt Sirgh. Ar'end K g Q Q 9/17/97 Date:
INVALID:
Dele: 10/6/97 REs0LUTION: NU has concluded that the issue reported in Discrepancy Report, DR MP3-0141, does not represent a discrepant condition. MP 3789AA is performed by the use of an AWO. AWOs require Operations sign-off when completed. Therefore, OPS would be Informed of a failed surveillance. However, the failed surveillance does not require entry into the LCO as it is performed before outside temperature is below 17 degrees. The heaters are required only when outside air temperature is less than 17 degrees to help maintain Aux building temperature above 65 degrees. The control room would be alerted to a faulted heater when Aux building low temperature alarm was received at 69 degrees (refer to ARP 3353.VP1 A/C 14). The ARP provides instructions to increase temperature in the CHS/CCP ares and also provides reference to prevalling Tech Spec 3.03 (when Aux Building temperature is below 65 degrees) and to TRM definition 1.45, Charging Pump Operability.
Changes 17 and 16 to rev. O of ARPs 3353.VP1A and C, respectively, were idileled duir tu changes in the TRM and Toch Specs from MMOD M3-97566. The changes, SQR approved e- 9/27/97, removed the refsrence to TRM definition 1.45 and
(' replaced it with reference to Tech Specs and TRM 3.1.2.2, <
3.1.2.4,3.5.2, and 3.5.3. Tech Spec surveillances will have acceptance critsrla, methodology and frequency specifically addressed in the Tech Spec. The CHS and CCP Tech Specs do not have specific requirements for area heater operability tests and are, therefore, considered Non Tech Spec surveillances.
Significance Level criteria do not apply here as thic is not a discrepant condition.
Conclusion NU has concluded that the issue reported in Olscrepancy Report, DR MP3-0141, does not represent a discrepant condition. The surveillance is performed as an AWO v.nd as such, receives Operations sign-off when completed. A1:,o, the surveillance is performed before the heaters are required so failure of the surveillance would not require entry into the Tech Spec LCOs.
The heaters are part of the support systems and are not specifically listed in Tech Specs. Therefore, testing of these systems would not be considered Tech Spec.
Significance Level criteria do not apply here as this is not a discrepant condition.
Previously identined by Nu? O Yes (Gi No Non Discrepent Condition
~
- 1 Yes Q No Review
- AcceMaW W AcceptaW Needed Date inMlator: Navarro. Mark VT Lead: Ryan. Thomas J B O O w' VT Mgr: schoofer. Don K Q O O m7 Printed 10/15/9711:25A6 AM Page 2 of 3
_ ummmmmme Northeast Utilities ICAVP DR No. DR.MP3 0141 Millstone Unit 3 Discrepancy Report O- ,,,.-...rv, . - ,
IRC Ctunn: Shah, Anand V = 9 3g,,ggy g g q g,ggy Date: ..
SL Conenents:
O O
PrWed 10/159711:25 50 AM p,p 3 g 3 e
i
Northeast Utilities ICAVP DR ND. DR MP3 0154 Millstone Unit 3 Discrepancy Report Rev6ew Group: Opershone & Maintenance and Teehng DR RESOLUTION ACCEPTED Re~ - ,-e Diecipiane: Other
-. e., ,e-Discreparry Type: Test implementauon O vee 9g SystemProcese: QSS NRC Signinconce level: 4 Date faxed to NU:
Date Published: Gr22S7 Dieuepency: Missing Documents in Preoperational Test Package for QSS
Description:
The preoperational test package for the Quench Spray System (QSS) requires a surveillance test (SP 331105) to document that a valid QSS nonel air test was completed. The surveillance test documents are missing from the QSS preoperational test package.
FSAR 6.2.2.4.1 requires that
- Means are provided for periodic in place alt flow tests through the quench spray noules ... The test will also be performed during the final stage of preoperational testing for this system to verify that the nonles are not plugged."
Preoperational test T3309-P001, Quench Spray System, provides the necessary acceptance criteria and direction to satirfy this requirement. Section 7.3 of this preoperuuonal test directs that surveillance procedure SP 331105, Containment C Quench Header Nonio Flow Test, be performed to verify
( acceptable flow from each header nonle, and to in:.lude the completed procedure in the test data package.
The completed surveillance procedure, with test results, is not in the preoperational test package. Therefore, the requirement that the air flow test be performed during the final stages of preoperational testing cannot be verified.
Rev6ew Vowl invalid Needed Date init6ator: Pierwovacz, R.
O O O S/12S7 VT Lead: Bees, Ken 8 O O e/12/97 VT Mgr schopfer, Don K O O O S/17/87 IRC Chmn: singh, Anand K O O O S/17'S7 Date:
INVALID:
Date: 10/6/97 REsOLUTK)N: Disposition:
NU has concluded that Discrepancy Report DR MP3-0154 does not represent a discrepant condition A copy of procedure SP 31105 complN on 7/31/85 was requested and obtained from Nuclear Records on 9/24/97 and is being transmitted with this response. Significance level criteria do not apply as this is not a discrepant condition.
Conclusion:
NU has concluded that Discrepancy Report DR MP3 0154 does not represent a discrepant condition _ A copy of comoteted Printed 10/159711:26.34 AM Page 1 of 2
1 N:rth:ast Utilities ICAVP DR No. DR MP3 0154 Millstone Unit 3 Discrepancy Report procedure SP 31105, obtained from Nuclear Records, is being transmitted with this response Significance level enteria do not apply as this is not a discrepant condition.
~ ~ Se vbusly identif4d by NU7 O Yes -el No Non Discrepent Cot'dNion
't Yes Q No Review P R.
Acceptable Not Acceptable Needed Date VT t. tad: Base, Ken VT Mgr: Schopfer, Don K IRC Chmn: Singh, Anand K 7
Date:
SL Corrrnents:
O O
Pnnted 10/159711:26 43 AM Page 2 of 2
.. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ - - - - - . - - - .-